Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> New Perl Mascot
>
> =head1 ABSTRACT
>
> Perl has no common symbol usable by the public at large to state to
> the world "I am a Perl Programmer, and D**n Proud Of It!"
>
> =head1 DESCRIPTION
>
> The symbol that would be commonly used for this is t
From: Tim Conrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> I don't know trademark law, but it seems unlikely that
> O'Reilly can trademark the concept of the camel, or all
> representations of the camel.
No. They can't trademark the "concept" of the camel. But they _have_
trademarked their camel logo and i
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:46:44 -0500, David Grove wrote:
[RFC 343 v1]
A camel is a horse designed by committee. What do you get when you
design a camel by committee?
-- Rocco Caputo / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim Conrow wrote:
> I don't know trademark law, but it seems unlikely that O'Reilly can
> trademark the concept of the camel, or all representations of the camel.
I checked out the O'Reilly trademark at one point at the USA Trademark and
Patent Office site. I don't have time to dig up the resul
David Grove wrote:
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > New Perl Mascot
> >
> > =head1 VERSION
> >
> > Maintainer: David Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: 28 Sep 2000
> > Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Number: 343
> > Version: 1
> > Status: Developing
> I hope you guys don't mind my placi
At 14:01 -0500 2000.09.29, Garrett Goebel wrote:
>From: Tim Conrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>
>> I don't know trademark law, but it seems unlikely that
>> O'Reilly can trademark the concept of the camel, or all
>> representations of the camel.
>
>No. They can't trademark the "concept" of the ca
Err.. A new version of a popular programming language?
- Original Message -
From: "Rocco Caputo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 8:20 PM
Subject: RE: RFC 343 (v1) New Perl Mascot
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:46:44 -0
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
The Artistic License Must Be Changed
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Bradley M. Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Sep 2000
Last Modified: 29 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 211
Versi
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Perl6's License Should Be a Minor Bugfix of Perl5's License
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Bradley M. Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 13 Sep 2000
Last Modified: 29 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Perl6's License Should be (GPL|Artistic-2.0)
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Bradley M. Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 29 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 346
Version: 1
Status: Devel
YES. This is starting to make better sense and provide for some protections.
Comments inserted.
> Permissions for Redistribution of Modified Versions of the Package as Source
>
> (4) You may modify your copy of the source code of this Package in any way
> and distribute that Modified Ve
> >(b) ensure that the installation of Your non-source Modified Version
> >does not conflict in any way with an installation of the
> >Standard
> >Version, and include for each program installed by the Modified
> >Version clear documentation
Wait, is this a logic puzzle?
A camel is designed by a committee, and is a horse
what is a camel designed by committee?
Answer is simple... a camel.
it's actually a horse designed by committee
unless I missed something
Is this like the old question, if a rooster was sitting on a roof and lai
David Grove wrote:
> > >(b) ensure that the installation of Your non-source Modified Version
> > >does not conflict in any way with an installation of the
> > >Standard
> > >Version, and include for each program installed by the Modified
> > >
From Artistic-2.0beta3
> > (4) You may modify your copy of the source code of this Package in any way
> > and distribute that Modified Version (either gratis or for a
> > Distribution Fee, and with or without a corresponding binary, bytecode
> > or object code version of the M
> > (7) You may aggregate this Package (either the Standard Version or
> > Modified Version) with other packages and distribute the resulting
> > aggregation provided that You do not charge a licensing fee for the
> > Package. Distribution Fees are permitted, and licensing fee
> The Artistic License
> Version 2.0beta3, October 2000
I just realized that some of you might have read 2.0beta2 and don't want to
take the time to read beta3. Here's the change, so you can view them
quickly. I'll do the same for future ver
> New Perl Mascot
>
> Maintainer: David Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 28 Sep 2000
> Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Number: 343
> Version: 1
> Status: Developing
I basically agree that we need a mascot, and one that isn't encumbered by a
proprietary trademark license.
Howeve
>(c) ensure that the Modified Version includes notification of the
>changes made from the Standard Version, and offer the
>machine-readable source of the Modified Version, under the exact
>license of the Standard Version, by mail order.
I feel a "in exc
On Friday, September 29, 2000 9:31 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> David Grove wrote:
> > > >(b) ensure that the installation of Your non-source Modified
> > > >Version
> > > >does not conflict in any way with an installation of the
> > > >
> > Let ActiveState make their PerlScript, PerlEX, and pseudocompiler if they
> > want, and charge whatever they want for it. But if perl is to be free, it
> > needs to be redistributable without any loopholes providing them the
> > ability to proprietarize the language itself, or make a community
21 matches
Mail list logo
