a superb debugger.
Thanks in advance,
Jason Spiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sybase Open Watcom Public License version 1.0
1. General; Definitions. This License applies only to the following
software programs: the open source versions of Sybase's Watcom C/C++
and Fortran compiler products (Software), which
of the same
scope and extent as Sybase's licenses under Sections 2.1 and 2.2.
It seems to me that the clause only grants Sybase rights to
distributors' patents for the purpose of developing and distributing
Open Watcom, not for any other purpose. Am I correct?
Kind regards,
Jason Spiro [EMAIL PROTECTED
://bugs.debian.org/383316 ; the most important
message of that thread is http://bugs.debian.org/383316#95 .)
The question follows:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Sami Kyöstilä [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 27 mars 2007 12:43
Subject: Re: FoF package for Debian
To: Jason Spiro [EMAIL PROTECTED
2007/3/27, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could modify the MIT license) we could
get Teosto to agree on more liberal terms than we would get if
Teosto
2007/3/28, Andrew Donnellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/28/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which you
have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Ouch. As was indicated earlier this seems
2007/3/28, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue Mar 27 20:54, Jason Spiro wrote:
2007/3/27, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could
Hi Matthew,
2007/4/26, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu Apr 26 16:25, Jason Spiro wrote:
Copyright (C) year copyright holders
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
a copy of this work (the Work) to use, modify, copy, publish,
distribute
2007/4/27, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu Apr 26 21:16, Jason Spiro wrote:
I don't know much about how to write licenses, and this is the first
one I have ever written. I figured that everything after the subject
to the following conditions: would automatically override
On 5/15/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
How about:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/legalcode with 4. d.
added saying:
You may not publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally
perform the Work except as part of the game and you may not
9 matches
Mail list logo
