On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Caio Tiago Oliveira<cai...@gmail.com> wrote: > It means they deserve rights to only allow content released under an > OSI-approved license or another one SourceForge.net approves. And everything > SF.net does will be subject to that license. > > There is no copyright given to SF.net. That would require an explicit joint > copyright assignment and signature (sent by fax), anyway.
Let me ask some questions, I don't understand this, please explain. 1. But what does this tell us about our rights as a recipient of this binary only translation? 2. What rights do I have as a user? 2.1 Can I reuse the translation, reverse engineer it? 2.2 Under which terms do the .res file and help files fall? 3. What value does sourceforge have in hosting it? 4. What value does anyone have from a outdated translation that noone can update? In my opinion, it would be a non-free extension that has no place getting the benefit of public hosting or praise. Binary only release for me may be derived works of some open source licenses, but cannot be considered in my eyes open source software in the first class. thanks, mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@native-lang.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@native-lang.openoffice.org
