How The Little Guy Can Make Big Money in Commercial Real Estate - Now!
If you answered yes, then you need to understand how you can profit from the greatest wealth transfer is history. Here are just a few reasons why we love commercial real estate: 1. Huge Wealth Creator. Available To Anyone. Rich or Poor. No Fancy Degrees Needed. 2. You Can Participate in Several Different Ways. We show you one strategy that anyone can do that can lead to... 3. Multiple Income Streams On Every Deal. With Proper Structuring, A Commercial Deal Can Bring You Large Sums Of Income Immediately, Regular Monthly Income, And Even Greater Sums In The Future Join us this Tuesday night (TOMORROW) December 1st - Live - at 9pm ET, 6pm PT when we will reveal closely held deal structuring secrets that can be applied to almost any type of distressed commercial real estate deal. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/399016896 You will want to make sure you have a pen and paper available as this will be a content rich webinar. To remind you, this is going to be a live event, and we will be answering your questions. Due to the bandwidth constraints, we’re only able to accommodate the first 75 registrants. Please be sure to register now to secure your slot. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/399016896 Thanks, and we look forward to hearing you on the call. Sincerely, Distressed Commercial Capital Group 156 Fifth Avenue Suite 1234 New York, New York 10010 PS If you can't make this, be sure to register so that you get the replay instructions! https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/399016896 http://app.streamsend.com/private/w4D0/NeX/jLRZnWz/unsubscribe/7493721
Re: Skype/Facebook trademark logos in Debian packages
In message hev0h8$ui...@ger.gmane.org, Joe Smith unknown_kev_...@hotmail.com writes Now I looka at the other extreme. In theory, with copyright if you independently create a work that happens to be absolutely identical (say letter by letter or pixel by pixel), without even knowing about the other work, then the result is two works each with a seperate copyright that just happen to be indistinguishable. Of course that is scholarly theory, and the law in the real world is ill equiped to handle such a possibility. This, of course, can easily happen with photography :-) (I speak loosly above, talking about a work having a copyright. I obviously mean that the authors or some other rights holder (such as in the case of a work for hire) being granted a limited monopoly on repdoucing the work, among other things.) Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - anth...@thewolery.demon.co.uk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Skype/Facebook trademark logos in Debian packages
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:41:40 + Anthony W. Youngman wrote: In message hev0h8$ui...@ger.gmane.org, Joe Smith unknown_kev_...@hotmail.com writes Now I looka at the other extreme. In theory, with copyright if you independently create a work that happens to be absolutely identical (say letter by letter or pixel by pixel), without even knowing about the other work, then the result is two works each with a seperate copyright that just happen to be indistinguishable. Of course that is scholarly theory, and the law in the real world is ill equiped to handle such a possibility. This, of course, can easily happen with photography :-) Similar photos, maybe. But pixel-by-pixel identical ones, I really doubt... -- New location for my website! Update your bookmarks! http://www.inventati.org/frx . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgpkvynrZufn3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mixture of Code unter GPL-2+ and UnRAR license compatible?
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:47:38 +0100 Tomáš Bžatek wrote: Hi all, Hi! let me shed some light on source files structure: ./common/ -- GPLv2+, shared core across several modules, cannot be relicensed (LGPLv2+ might be an option though). ./unrar/unrar.c -- GPLv2+, may be relicensed if needed. It's a bridge between two APIs. ./unrar/unrar/ -- original unrar sources (there might be few modifications, but I hope to solve them soon, so we can have unmodified unrar sources there). All these sources are statically linked to a single shared object (library), which is being loaded by the master application. Now the question is: is it allowed to statically link object files with different licenses? If these licenses are incompatible with each other, as it is the case here, the result is a legally undistributable work, AFAICT. Since the unrar license is (non-free and) GPL-incompatible, it is my understanding that anyone who distributes the linked resulting library would violate the copyright of the authors of the GPLv2+'ed part. In order to allow such a linking, the copyright holders of the GPLv2+'ed part can add an exception (that is to say, an additional permission), as explained in http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs See also http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#FSWithNFLibs Is it allowed to load such library into a GPLv2+ application (technically speaking it's linking again, in runtime)? I think that this also requires an exception granted by the GPLv2+'ed application copyright holders, as above. [...] That said, I haven't spoken to unrar author yet, wanted to know lawyers opinion first. Most of us debian-legal regulars are *not* lawyers. I am *not* a lawyer myself. There *are* a few lawyers that sometimes contribute to debian-legal, but, of course, if you need real legal advice, I recommend that you hire an actual lawyer... I hope this clarifies. -- New location for my website! Update your bookmarks! http://www.inventati.org/frx . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgpA65BThQuty.pgp Description: PGP signature
