Don Armstrong wrote:
To underline, the following clauses in the CDDL are problematic:
9. MISCELLANEOUS
[...]
This License shall be governed by the law of the jurisdiction
specified in a notice contained within the Original Software
(except to the extent applicable law, if any,
Francesco Poli wrote:
We must determine what is the preferred form for making modifications to
the song. I'm not sure an Ogg Vorbis + MIDI form qualifies...
What sort of modifications?
...Actually, a concept from copyright law may help here. There are
*two* copyrights on any given recording.
Shriramana Sharma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all your feedback, but the GPL also has some clauses that are
not applicable to documentation as pointed out at:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyNotGPLForManuals
Debian does not agree with the FSF opinion on this. The FSF's
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
Hello.
I have heard that in copyright declarations like:
---
Copyright (C) 2007, Company X, Country Y. All rights reserved.
---
it is incorrect to use (C) in place of the symbol © which is the strict
copyright symbol. Is this so?
This is not legal
Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ben Finney
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Giacomo A. Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ben Finney wrote:
[the (C) sequence is] possibly not a valid copyright
indicator. The © symbol is
Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
Licence documents MUST be invariant. They are legal documents, with
legal force, and you're trying to give the recipient the right to mess
about with them!
No, you're wrong. This is a FAQ. There's a difference between
changing the license for a work (impossible)
Ian Jackson wrote:
If this is forced to a GR we should have an option along these
lines:
We note that many license texts are copyrighted works, licensed only
under meta-licenses which prohibit the creation of derivative
license texts.
We do not consider this a problem.
Although not my
Don Armstrong wrote:
I don't believe we need an amendment to the Social Contract to
specifically state this as the case, but a correctly worded one which
specifically amended the social contract and/or the DFSG appropriately
may be worth some thought.
Unfortunatly, the currently proposed
: The most vital of these works are included in
Debian, but we strive to replace all of them with free works. For the
remaining
works, we have created contrib and non-free areas in our archive.'
--
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's just a goddamned piece of paper.
-- President
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
Without this exception, if the DFSG were followed literally, most
license texts could not be shipped in Debian and would have to be
shipped alongside Debian instead, which would be very annoying.
MJ Ray wrote:
Most? I thought most licence
This is a proposed text for a GR. I can't actually propose a GR (not a
DD), so I request that someone else who cares propose it or a similar
proposal.
---begin proposed GR---
Resolved:
That the DFSG shall be amended, by inserting at the end of clause 3, in italics:
(There is a special
I wrote:
Historically, this exception has been an unwritten assumption; in most
discussions, this exception has been agreed on by everyone involved.
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
If that is the case, then why would it be necessary to write this down
in the DFSG? Personally, I don't think we need to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
The trademark holder hereby grants permission to any person to use the
trademark
(and derivative marks) in any way except one: you may not use it to falsely
represent something else as being
to forward this to anyone who's doing
something about the 'logo issues'.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Insert famous quote here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in this purpose
Which pretty much covers it.
Now, whether that's a reasonable license is another matter
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read it and weep.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Text_of_Gore_speech_0116.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
tree of
the software somewhere, they are all the name of the original software
- at different points in its development.
Right, if that's guaranteed, then it should be a DFSG-free restriction. Can
that ever be not the case (a Reserved Font Name sneaking in somehow)?
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
be infringing.
Don't try to enforce trademarks using copyright law; it's almost always
non-free.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
the requirement for sources.
Yep.
Since i am seen as not trusthy to analyze such problems, i think to
deblock this situation, it would be best to have a statement from
debian-legal to back those claims (or to claim i am wrong in the above).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
*doesn't* restrict the rights
of the recipient is *not* affected by the clause no matter what it looks
like, then we're happy.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
to the game's creator
*anyway*, even if he holds no copyright, patent, or trademark claims (which
he probably does).
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
. :-/
Also, intent doesn't mean action. :-)
The author of this script hereby grants irrevocable permission to any party
who may have access to it to treat it as though it were a work to which any
and all copyrights have expired.
I think that would be an improvement.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
: it doesn't waive the rights of
heirs or assignees. To the extent possible, we want to do that *too*. Any
ideas?
(You can't waive your right to protest against mutilation of
your literary work, and software is a literary work according
to Berne and WIPO.)
Arnoud
--
Nathanael Nerode
Michael Poole wrote:
Nathanael Nerode writes:
Do you have any evidence to indicate that these byte streams contain
any copyrightable or otherwise protected content?
They look creative to me. I certainly couldn't write them independently,
on
my own. Under modern copyright law
are LGPL and some are GPL. The end-result library
is GPL. My conclusion is that this is DFSG compatible. Am I right?
Cheers,
Øystein Gisnås
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
to
the Debian package system? Would I have to Recommends: qmail instead?
No, you can Depends: on out-of-Debian stuff if your package is contrib
or non-free.
Thank you for your time,
Ryan Finnie
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud
-license magic-smtpd under the GPL (it looks like some of their
other software is GPL-licensed), and/or ask them to contact
debian-legal to discuss what can be done to make it possible to
include magic-smtpd with Debian.
Again, thanks for the input.
Ryan Finnie
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
Evan Prodromou wrote:
On Sun, 2006-24-09 at 12:06 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Worse, the PDF description of the parallel distribution amendment appears
to describe an amendment which is less restrictive than necessary for
Debian's purposes (see comment 11). (Proper parallel distribution
beyond copyright licensing sometimes come into play.
And particular licensors may specify different interpretations of the
license text. So this statement does not mean that Debian will
automatically consider every work licensed under these licenses to be free.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
Anthony Towns wrote:
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 03:49:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
The answer to the question in the subject is simple: NO.
Thankyou for your opinion. I note you seemed to neglect to mention that
you're not a lawyer.
Yes, I'm not a lawyer. Do not rely on anything I say
avoiding that clause for new works -- heard of the two-clause
BSD license? You have to be careful with that sort of clause because
sometimes it turns out that the prohibited practice is not prohibited
everywhere, and then it really is a restriction for that jurisdiction.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL
a
good explanation of this. It seems to be a better formulation (applies to
cases where technology effectively restricts rights by accident, and to
cases where it was intended to restrict rights but doesn't), but I'm not
sure why it's crucial.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted
/
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
as separate works.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
not agree to that statement ever, no matter what the license was,
because it surrenders certain fair use rights.
Perhaps I am downloading it for purposes of archival permitted under fair
use in the US and library privilege in the UK. I do not agree to the
license in that case.
--
Nathanael
://members.aol.com/heiska/ecframe/future.html
I would expect that the new code was completely different, which would
explain this.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Software.
Sorry for the sudden burdening of information, I tried to give all the
information I can.
-- Juan
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
, seeing as how it's more text than the whole rest of the
license. In contrast, I'd expect any disclaimer tucked on page nine of a
ten-page-long license to be found inconspicuous. And lawyers do *THAT* all
the time.
:-P
Arnoud
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted
the unreadable all-caps version. :-/
Huge all-caps hunks make my eyes slide right over; it looks sort of like bad
ASCII art.
Arnoud
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
glance, I think the only clause I really want
to get changed is the anti-DRM clause.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
likely to be sued over: the
company clearly didn't authorize this use.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A thousand reasons. http://www.thousandreasons.org/
Lies, theft, war, kidnapping, torture, rape, murder...
Get me out of this fascist nightmare!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
posted mailed
Michael Poole wrote:
Nathanael Nerode writes:
In the Linux kernel,
drivers/media/video/usbvideo/vicam.c
contains *long* sequences which appear to have been lifted from some
other driver without permission or attribution, probably by
wire-sniffing.
Not short sequences
think the problem is more about GPL-compatibility than about
DFSG-freeness. DFSG #4 already allows licenses forbidding re-use of the
name or version number, and this isn't much a different case here.
Right.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he
it impossible for Debian's mirror network.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MJ Ray wrote:
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-August/003876.html
[...]
The main motivation was to prevent license complication,
*not* to prohibit parallel distribution.
This is emphasized quite clearly in that message
there is, I'd
go by the plain meaning.)
In other words, I think CC-v3 is OK unless the licensor indicates a
strange interpretation.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 01:57:31AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
snip
At least we actually have the source for the acenic code, even though we
don't have a free license for it.
Euh, no, it is a binary-only firmware blob last i checked, but i may be
wrong.
Yes
of
# this software code. (c) 2006 Amazon Digital Services, Inc. or its
# affiliates.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
.
Of course, we haven't had any such choice. So we should ask again.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
MJ Ray wrote:
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Where's the cc-nl lead's explanation? It's something.
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-August/003876.html
Hope that helps,
It really does help a lot.
in any case i do not think (and that judgment was
shared
currently is kind of obnoxious, but Debian still
tries to follow it to the letter. With a cooperative upstream, there
should be no trouble getting an ironclad license/public domain assignment.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why
in free software because making
relicensing hard can prevent individuals from being pressured
to relicense. This is an example of the jujitsu of free software,
turning the worst features of copyright law to at least some good use.)
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating
ones.
If the Kadu team owns all the copyright on the sources where the license
is intended to be changed,
Clearly they don't.
they can decide to change the license for
those components themself (or, to add the openssl exception in your case).
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush
, since the Berne
Convention was substantially based on French law (which is why it sucks so
bad). In other words, it's covered by copyright, yes.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet
-devel archive and find the
message from Major MMS
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
is acceptable. As long as source
accompanies binary, you can charge as much as you like. The GPL has the
same requirement.
I don't know why they felt the need to roll their own license, but it looks
free.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
On Aug 31, Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marco trolled again. FYI, no serious person disagrees with this
interpretation.
Except every other distribution, which usually retain real lawyers
to advise them
Diverting to -legal.
Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 12:48:35AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Yeah, that is something which is needed. We need someone to go over
larry's list, which i have copiedto the debian wiki, and find out who
the copyright holder
Anthony Towns wrote:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 12:15:20AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
I'd love to see a legal opinion from the SPI lawyers regarding who would
be liable if Debian did commit copyright infringment (or whatever) and
someone sued.
FWIW, there's a few things I'd love to see
do not mind anymore.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with legal issues, anyway.)
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
good thing: the cdrtools maintainers have requested that it be removed.
Work is ongoing to get decent replacements. This *will* be fixed.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Toni Mueller wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, 30.08.2006 at 09:27:21 +0200, Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
technically does not permit redistribution. At least 53
this be in Debian?
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
Ps: Please keep me CCd, I'm not on the list.
Well, I don't think I helped you with your problem, so I won't. :-/
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet
. If people are actually getting sued for using it.
(Well, until and unless one of those people wins their suit by getting the
patent invalidated, of course.)
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet
and an essentially independent set of laws.
This issue
is not just limited to the US.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
in an
astonishingly slow way.
Yes. :-/
Hence you could consider taking a vacation from
your bug hunting when the release gets nearer and then starting over
again after etch is out (or otherwise etch won't be out, ever!) ;p
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA
.
It's very difficult to make good suggestions in that situation. It
feels like we're trying to give directions through a maze we haven't
seen while blinded.
Yep.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet
that the license does not give you any
permissions above the applicable laws, so that people don't sue them
after being sent to Guantanamo for exporting crypto.
Marco's absolutely correct here.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't
Steve Langasek wrote:
Is this interpretation in keeping with how the CC folks understand the
license?
We don't know. Still. Doesn't that suck? CC is not entirely transparent
unfortunately.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud
Andrew Donnellan wrote:
I'm guessing these may very well be uncopyrightable as a list of facts.
I think that's what we're all assuming. There's no real way to express them
differently: facts, idea/expression merger, etc. Not copyrightable.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush
and the other parts of the kernel. Simply putting files side by side is
mere aggregation -- what's happening with the drivers and firmware might be
mere aggregation, but nobody can be sure until a court case happens.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Debian needs to make a decision on how it will deal with this legal
minefield. That is higher priority than the entire discussion going on
right now, because it determines whether Debian will distribute
, please do.
Reports of other decisions at the iSummit (things like 'hum votes'
and strong bias from the presiding members) fill me with FUD.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet
its patent law is an almost-literal copy of the EPC.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-described Land of the Free.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rulings
in violation of precedent for about 20 years, and there's currently a
Supreme Court case pending to try to stop them), Debian would be able to
distribute nothing if it respected all of these clearly invalid patents.
Hell, xor is patented.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:26:56PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
snip
Actually, letting an overworked team of four with (to my knowledge) zero
legal expertise settle questions of legal liability is pretty absurd too.
They are the team responsible for vetting
the original companies, and then I'd have a
real case for a lawsuit.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
. :-)
This is a random selection, but I seem to have already run across the full
gamut of possibilities.
Kurt
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
it incompatible with the
DFSG?
Commented in another post if it really prohibited parallel
distribution, I would think it's non-free -- but I think it does *not*
prohibit parallel distribution. So I think it *is* free.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA
in brackets (13 and 15)
are
scheduled for removal; at least I assume they are since that's what it meant
during
the first draft. This confused me on the first draft; I dunno why they're in
there at all.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This space intentionally left blank.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Kevin Bube [Fri, Jul 07 2006, 11:29:21AM]:
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Adam Borowski [Fri, Jul 07 2006, 10:38:32AM]:
* dvdrtools, a fork of the last GPLed version, is in non-free
Please look at dvdrtools' files, eg. cdrecord.c before
licensing analysis like --
well,
the best analogy is debugging.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
recommend here on debian-legal. MIT/Expat is
the simplest, best-understood, and easiest to apply of the non-copyleft
licenses.
The GNU GPL is the most widely used and most well understood copyleft license.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A thousand reasons. http://www.thousandreasons.org
Pessi and ask if that includes the right to sell.
If he says yes, then I'd say it's fine.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Instead, we front-load the flamewars and grudges in
the interest of efficiency.) --Steve Lanagasek,
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/09/msg01056.html
The CID Font Code Public License is non-free, per the discussion linked to by
bug 211765.
At the time, Branden couldn't find anything actually under the license.
One can find this utility shipped in Sarge's version of the 'xutils'
package, and the full license included in its debian/copyright
I can't answer most of these questions.
But you will probably be helped by the fact that databases, as mere
collections of facts, are usually *not copyrightable*, certainly not in the
US. So these documents are most likely in the public domain. I believe this
is the way to go: unless there
with. This is probably the quickest
turnaround we've ever gotten on a license issue from any upstream, with the
possible exception of packages where Debian is upstream.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read it and weep.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Text_of_Gore_speech_0116.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
this clause. It doesn't operate as
intended and it causes problems. Hopefully a satisfactory
patent-retaliation clause will be avaialbe in a future version of the
GPL.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This space intentionally left blank.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 15:18:32 -0400 Nathanael Nerode wrote:
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:54:53 +1000 Andrew Donnellan wrote:
There is a license called the Free Art license, I don't know if that
is DFSG-free.
I believe that it is.
If you do, could you please reply to my
: the different
stuff about original work of art and The Original is all about that.
If you don't have a physical original, it's a cumbersome and unwieldy license.
If you do, it's a great license.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org
in the
file to include your name and the year.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's just a goddamned piece of paper.
-- President Bush, referring to the US Constitution
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
the developers and ask them to do exactly that.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Insert famous quote here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the public domain.
That's my preferred Public Domain specification.
--
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 09:31:26PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Is it really DFSG-free to have a license which prohibits placing a copy
you make of the document on an encrypted filesystem? Applying chmod o-r
to it (on a multiuser system)? Putting a copy of it in a safe
Whats debian-legals position about the MPL?
Looking at google I see a lot of Summary - non-free and Not really
non-free mails.
So, I have some packages in NEW that are MPL only licensed. Whats the
current way to go? Reject, accept?
Reject, unless the authors have announced relicensing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If so, I expect it will be more
efficient if we can approach the FSF for a blanket license change.
No; from what we can tell, RMS is personally blocking even the simplest and
most obvious license changes, and nobody with authority in the FSF will go up
against him,
From the BOLA license:
To all effects and purposes, this work is to be considered Public Domain.
Justin Pryzby wrote:
Some would complain that this doesn't give explicit permission to
modify and/or distribute, and the typical suggestion is to use either
the MIT license (liberal) or GPLv2
1 - 100 of 720 matches
Mail list logo
