Reply in-line :-
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 12:17, Raj Mathur <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all,
Apologies for a long long mail well in advance. I usually take
24-48 hours before responding to mails like Raj and Sudhanwa wrote.
Sometimes we do respond in haste :-
> While on the subject, your mail licensing weirdness:
>
>> My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
>
> still prevents me from selling a DVD of ILUGD mailing list archives.
> This is a major blow, since the demand for these DVDs is constantly
> rising and currently outstrips the combined demand for pirated copies
> of Popcorn Frigidaire and Catnap Refunds, and I'm going to sue you for
> making me lose crows worth of legitimate business due to persistent
> combative, militant licensing.
@ Raj Mathur . Its your prerogative to do whatever suing you want to
for as you my 'persistent combative, militant licensing'
If it was an attempt to intimidate me or an attempt at humor then both
are unfortunately lost for neither makes sense to me.
Also from what little I understand, these matters are still evolving.
As Mr. Duggal of Supreme Court says it
"The same case presented the same way to 5 different judges may lead
to 5 different decisions"
I have my own take in the manner.
Its easy to intimidate a single person but let's say if it was a big
FOSS company would Raj's reply be the same, I wonder.
Let's take a very real as well as hypothetical scenario.
Let's say that shirish was not just [email protected] but
[email protected] or [email protected] (Please remember this
is all hypothetical)
and let's say redhat (or ubuntu) as a matter of policy on their SMTP
Server puts a signature which gets added to every mail something on
the lines of
a. It may have intellectual property so the reader shouldn't disclose
it. Disclosing the same may lead to suing.
b. If due to advice or help given in the mail, if there is any damage
to a person's computer/data etc. the company wouldn't be held liable.
From a company's stand point it may be the right thing to do.
a. While the person may be paid on company time for working with FOSS
communities the company wouldn't be like to be liable for any help,
advice or whatever told by any single individual.
b. The possibility of disgruntled employees taking a final shot is
always there.
One of many reasons that a company may have.
While I do not know about ILUG-D but have seen something like the
license I pointed out in quite a few mailing lists.
Now as far as Mr. Sudhanwa pointed out, 'copyright violation' is a
serious allegation.
The first draft of my blog post had the notice that the pictures were
taken from the freed.in or freed.in flickr pool with hyperlinks given
of the two .
So there was no attempt to tell that the photos were of my own.
> Regards,
>
> -- Raju
> --
> Raj Mathur [email protected] http://kandalaya.org/
> GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F
> PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/ || It is the mind that moves
--
Regards,
Shirish Agarwal
My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
065C 6D79 A68C E7EA 52B3 8D70 950D 53FB 729A 8B17
_______________________________________________
ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
