Raul Miller wrote:
On 1/27/06, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
A question of law is addressed by likelihood of success on that
portion breach of contract claim that concerns its trademark
Which question of law is are you talking about here? What do you
mean by portion
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
On 1/18/06, Pedro A.D.Rezende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Object code is a well established term. GNUspeak is irrelevant.
The Copyright Act defines a computer program asa set of
statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly
Frank Küster wrote:
Pedro A.D.Rezende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Object code is a well established term. GNUspeak is irrelevant.
The Copyright Act defines a computer program asa set of
statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in
a computer
Michael K. Edwards wrote:
...
On 7/24/05, Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
I invite
you to question the assumption that algorithms are mathematics. My
preferred US dictionary (American Heritage, third edition) has it that
an algorithm is a step-by-step problem solving procedure,
Michael K. Edwards wrote:
On 13 Jul 2005 07:50:44 GMT, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael K. Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even so, Mr. Ravicher appears to be on the saner end of the range of
FSF associates. [...]
Isn't defaming a lawyer rather a stupid tactic for someone in the
MJ Ray wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Evan Prodromou) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 12:12:44PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
About Creative Commons:
I feel this needs a paragraph on CC's decision-making, but
I do not feel qualified to write it.
I have no way of finding that out, and I don't see why it's
Sean Kellogg wrote:
On Wednesday 13 April 2005 06:55 am, Raul Miller wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:28:59PM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
Failure to have a click-through license means that there is no
acceptance, which is a fundamental part of contract law. No acceptance,
no contract, no
7 matches
Mail list logo
