On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Lukasz Sokol <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/03/15 11:57, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > > > When there is NO license information in your repositories , this means > that > > > > "NO one can use them ." > > > > with respect to copy right laws or conventions . > > > > Pointer/Keyword/URL please? I presume for when it matters, one would ask > the author first...? > > > > > Thank you very much . > > > > Mehmet Erol Sanliturk > > > > el es > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_copyright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License-free_software "Personal" use is a different concept , because no one may know that a copy is used whether usage is permitted or not for a copyrighted work . Problem arises when "Redistribution" or ( "Derivative" works are "Published" ) . One is the following : http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/softwarecrnotice Some of these collected software published before a year in US , is in "Public Domain" in the US with respect to a law ( I do not remember the year exactly but it is around 1970 ) . ACM has denied this "Public Domain" concept by countering it with "Copyright Law" : More restrictive rules are effective even they ( restrictive and permissive ) are in the laws for the copyright holder . In summary , with respect to copyright laws ( there are minor differences in countries as related to Bern Convention agreement exceptions adopted ) anything is not explicitly mentioned is assumed to be not permitted . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
