On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 14:53, Glenn Maynard wrote:
Read it as as an additional restriction, all additional materials
mentioning ... It's still a restriction, and a cumbersome one.
I don't recall what makes advertising clauses DFSG-free. Unenforcability?
It doesn't violate DFSG 9, because
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:11:42PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
I don't recall what makes advertising clauses DFSG-free. Unenforcability?
It doesn't violate DFSG 9, because it's not making any claims on the
other software. The advertising clause kicks in whether you distribute
the software
OK, I was up _way_ too late...
As far as the Sun one, I meant that I didn't see what was wrong with the
additional paragraph Sun added...
*normally* I'm more lucid that that, but those must of been a
particularly bad 17 minutes.
I apologize for that, and promise to get more sleep before trying
On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 08:20, Santiago Vila wrote:
How does it not violate DFSG 9?
How it does? this software != other software
If I, for example, were to write an ad for the software, I'd have to
include that notice in my software.
[ Consider I could write a game that has the purpose and
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 20:17, Santiago Vila wrote:
This is the (in)famous advertising clause. [...]
It does not prevent the program from being
DFSG-free, [...]
How does it not violate DFSG 9?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On 26 Sep 2002, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 20:17, Santiago Vila wrote:
This is the (in)famous advertising clause. [...]
It does not prevent the program from being
DFSG-free, [...]
How does it not violate DFSG 9?
How it does? this software != other software
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 08:07:14AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 20:17, Santiago Vila wrote:
This is the (in)famous advertising clause. [...]
It does not prevent the program from being
DFSG-free, [...]
How does it not violate DFSG 9?
i think that :
The license
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:33:39PM +0200, Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
i think that :
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed
along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist
that all other programs distributed on the same medium
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26 Sep 2002, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 20:17, Santiago Vila wrote:
This is the (in)famous advertising clause. [...]
It does not prevent the program from being
DFSG-free, [...]
How does it not violate DFSG 9?
You are on
hi,
i'm making the package of a library (libevent) which has this license
this looks like a derived form of BSD license anyway i don't know
if i can put it under bsd license or i have to cut'n paste the license
inside the copyright file (anyway it looks debian compatible) .
the only difference
Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
i'm making the package of a library (libevent) which has this license
this looks like a derived form of BSD license anyway i don't know
if i can put it under bsd license or i have to cut'n paste the license
inside the copyright file (anyway it looks debian
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 01:53:20AM +0200, Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
hi,
i'm making the package of a library (libevent) which has this license
this looks like a derived form of BSD license anyway i don't know
if i can put it under bsd license or i have to cut'n paste the license
inside
12 matches
Mail list logo
