On 2 Nov 2008, at 22:58 , Sebastien LELONG wrote: >> I thought we figured a way out of this by declaring that the binary >> distribution (which means: code IN a PIC or a HEX file) could go >> WITHOUT attribution. > > No, we don't. Or we would have put such statements in the license > itself. Last > things said about this were: let the license as is, we can tolerate > people > not reproducing the license when distributing binaries.
"Tolerating" is not good enough in this litigation-happy society these days. We have to write it in. If you tolerate it, why not write it? >> Ask Wouter is this is OK. > And if you ask me, this is not OK ! Why would you tolerate it and not codify it? Again: try distributing a PIC without paper and a hex file (not in a PIC itself) without space for a 2k attribution! For the same reasons as above, this is impossible. If anything on this planet is shipped, it is with paper. If a hex file is sent in electronic form, it can easily be accompagnied by a 2k ASCII file. This is the trick of lawyers: you write something that looks obvious to the casual reader, but turns out something else in practice. >> Wouter is too important to loose. > I understand. By which I mean, and you understand, that our code can be burned on Wouter-distributed PICs, and Wouter has a link to us at his site. > > > Seb > -- > Sébastien LELONG > http://www.sirloon.net > http://sirbot.org > > > > > --- ir EE van Andel [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.fiwihex.nl Fiwihex B.V. Wierdensestraat 74, NL7604BK Almelo, Netherlands tel+31-546-491106 fax+31-546-491107 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
