Am Mo 28 Jan 2008 09:25:21 CET
schrieb Sean Kellogg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I cannot speak to the British system, so John
my very well be right in that context, but in the United States the
critical question is whether the advice being given is of a specific
or general nature.
In Germany the
Am Mo 28 Jan 2008 09:27:54 CET
schrieb John Halton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Perhaps first of all we need to ask if there is a legal system on
earth that would regard contributing to this mailing list as
constituting legal advice in the first place.
Okay: Yes there is. At least the German one, and,
Hi *,
I'm packaging a new software for the Debian-Med group, and the source shows
this statement:
/* This code may be used and modified for non-commercial purposes*/
/* but redistribution in any form requires written permission. */
This is clearly non-DFSG-free.
I've
Tristan Seligmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Copyright notices are only valid if they contain all three of:
* The word Copyright and/or the copyright symbol ©
* The year(s) the copyright began in the work
* The name of the legal entity that holds
Ben Finney wrote:
My understanding is that a copyright declaration on the work makes it
easier to prove to a court that the recipient knows that the work *is*
copyrighted to the specified entity, and that the copyright is
current.
Furthermore, in the event that a work is infringed, if the
* Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-01-30 15:57:06 +0100]:
Ben Finney wrote:
My understanding is that a copyright declaration on the work makes it
easier to prove to a court that the recipient knows that the work *is*
copyrighted to the specified entity, and that the copyright is
Tristan Seligmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. This is frustrating, because on the one hand, it's probably
worth avoiding an innocent infringement defense; on the other
hand, updating copyright notices every year seems like a rather
tedious task that people typically don't ever get around
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 04:33:19 pm Tristan Seligmann wrote:
Hmm. This is frustrating, because on the one hand, it's probably worth
avoiding an innocent infringement defense; on the other hand, updating
copyright notices every year seems like a rather tedious task that
people typically
Dear debian-legal,
A non-free program for which I maintain a package has changed its UI
toolkit from lesstif to Qt. The program is free for non-commercial use,
and upstream payed for a Qt licence. I understand that producing
binaries within Debian would be an infringement of the Qt licence.
Vous n'avez pas encore votre site Internet ?
Nous vous proposons la création de votre site clé en main (*)
Une conception adaptée avec des informations claires et précises.
Une charte graphique optimisée et conçue pour vos activités.
Voir nos créations
Vous possédez déjà votre
11 matches
Mail list logo
