Note: I've left Anthony Youngman's email address in the headers, but I
seem to have a local problem where email to Anthony bounces. [I can work
around that, using telnet, but it's a pain.] quote I strongly
suggest that you read the following two web pages:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:04:31AM +0100, Anthony Youngman wrote:
Sorry for lookout mangling my cut-n-paste - this isn't quite a proper
reply ...
And the guy who admins this system claims I should be able to
email you now... so hopefully you won't have to do much more of
that.
Did you look at
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 06:09:29AM -0400, I wrote:
Instead, it's pointing out that you can't prohibit employees [for
example, ad subsidiaries] from distributing it to your competitors or
Er, I meant at, not ad.
--
Raul
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:23:11AM +0100, Anthony Youngman wrote:
But as I see it, they (QM) are adding an extra restriction, as
proscribed by the GPL (clauses 6 and 7).
If you distribute to subsidiaries, you may not stop them distributing
to the world. But the GPL explicitly recognises
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 October 2004 11:09
To: Anthony Youngman
Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Is this software really GPL?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:04:31AM +0100, Anthony Youngman wrote:
Sorry for lookout mangling my cut-n-paste - this isn't quite a proper
reply
Sorry if this is not quite the right place, but I'm somewhat fuming ...
There's a really nice piece of software, called QM (it's a database)
that has allegedly been released under the GPL by its owner, one Martin
Philips, of a company called Ladybridge, in England.
He was talked into doing
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:23:33PM +0100, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
I strongly suggest that you read the following two web pages:
http://easyco.com/initiative/openqm/opensource/index.htm
and the accompanying faq:
http://easyco.com/initiative/openqm/opensource/faq.htm
Is there any
[I'm taking the liberty of Cc:'ing you against Debian list
policy. Please set MFT in the future if you wish people to respond to
you personally.]
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
Sorry if this is not quite the right place, but I'm somewhat fuming ...
There's a really nice piece
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 07:36:08PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
[4] GPL means GNU Public license and all sources are readily
available under the GPL. In this case, the author of those pages is
probably not competent.
Actually, the pages at those urls look fine -- it's either myself or
the other
Note: I've left Anthony Youngman's email address in the headers,
but I seem to have a local problem where email to Anthony bounces.
[I can work around that, using telnet, but it's a pain.]
quote
I strongly suggest that you read the following two web pages:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 07:36:08PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
Is there any reason to believe that by GPL they mean the GNU Public
License?
The G in GPL is General, not GNU. (I'm sure you know this, but
you said GNU Public License several times in this mail.)
I can think of several possible
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Raul Miller wrote:
quote
I strongly suggest that you read the following two web pages:
http://easyco.com/initiative/openqm/opensource/index.htm
and the accompanying faq:
http://easyco.com/initiative/openqm/opensource/faq.htm
/quote
On Tue, Oct
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 07:46:07PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 07:36:08PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
Is there any reason to believe that by GPL they mean the GNU Public
License?
The G in GPL is General, not GNU. (I'm sure you know this, but
you said GNU Public
Raul Miller wrote:
Is there any reason to believe that by GPL they mean the GNU Public
License?
Just a note: s/GNU Public License/General Public License/g. GPL is
General Public License, and GNU GPL is GNU General Public License;
there is no such thing as the GNU Public License, although it is
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:25:07PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
You cannot install, or ask your customer to install a GPL version of
OpenQM and then install your own product unless that product is also
delivered to the user under GPL or an approved variant.
This would be accurate for the
Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:25:07PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
You cannot install, or ask your customer to install a GPL version of
OpenQM and then install your own product unless that product is also
delivered to the user under GPL or an approved variant.
This would be
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:44:46PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
It's misleading.
Yes.
There are lawyers who will express things in a misleading fashion if
they think that's in the best interests of their clients, and if they
think they will not get in legal trouble for doing so.
--
Raul
17 matches
Mail list logo
