An impotant and obvious point is that this build on top of GPL, except
for section 3. So the other terms within the GPL are valid. Specially
section 6 and 7.

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Alexandro Colorado<[email protected]> wrote:
> OOo is LGPL v 3
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.html
>
> The license state on the modification aspects:
> 2. Conveying Modified Versions.
>
> If you modify a copy of the Library, and, in your modifications, a
> facility refers to a function or data to be supplied by an Application
> that uses the facility (other than as an argument passed when the
> facility is invoked), then you may convey a copy of the modified
> version:
>
>    * a) under this License, provided that you make a good faith
> effort to ensure that, in the event an Application does not supply the
> function or data, the facility still operates, and performs whatever
> part of its purpose remains meaningful, or
>    * b) under the GNU GPL, with none of the additional permissions of
> this License applicable to that copy.
>
> So my interpretation could vary, but this means to me that you should
> ensure that the liberties are garanteed and the proprietary code
> shouldn't interfere. This works in funny ways since they have an
> access key to the product (not the service). So this will violate the
> right to use the software.
>
> Another aspect is that the term of services doesnt allow to do reverse
> engineering or decompilation, and they dont offer the original source
> so for these matters it also violates it. However like I mention is my
> interpretation and this should be clarify by a more expert person.
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Arturo Davila<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Im not a lawyer or anything but doesnt the licence of OOo says that if
>> someone make a modification it should be under a GPL?
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Alexandro Colorado 
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi as I comment a few months back, Telefonica, one of the biggest cell
>>> carriers are selling OpenOffice.org for 3 Euro a month. In return they
>>> get OOo with support, however after this post
>>> http://bandaancha.eu/articulo/6611/telefonica-restringe-version-openoffice
>>>
>>> Is clear that Telefonica is not just modifying OOo but also breaking
>>> trademark rules. They took off .org from many of the dialogues. They
>>> also modify the installer and ask for a service key and they don't
>>> offer the source code and explicitly prohibits redistribution witch is
>>> a big negative for GPL OR LGPL.
>>>
>>> It seems the code is not delegated to components but is part of the
>>> actual build and can't be separated.  I for then solicit a motion to
>>> investigate this deeper and determine if Telefonica is indeed breaking
>>> the license and send  cease and dissist letter.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.telefonica.es/on/io/es/atencion/consultas_y_dudas/contratos/soluciones/openoffice/c_g_openoffice.pdf
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alexandro Colorado
>>> OpenOffice.org Espa&ntilde;ol
>>> IM: [email protected]
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexandro Colorado
> OpenOffice.org Espa&ntilde;ol
> IM: [email protected]
>



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
OpenOffice.org Espa&ntilde;ol
IM: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to