Re: crip (lack of) copyright notice
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008, Michael Crawford wrote: It says by Charlton Harrison and he documented when the releases were on his website. From that could I just construct a copyright notice and use that? My understanding is that copyright descends on a work the instant it is created. So the release dates could reasonably serve to indicate the copyright years. But I don't have a clue as to whether it would then be legal or appropriate for you to add an explicit notice. I guess you already did it, but have you tried contacting the upstreamer about this issue? I had a 'similar' situation [0] with the package mined (which is kinda.. in stand-by). Hope this thread [0] can help you to get an idea of what to do. [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/03/msg00097.html Regards, Mauro -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://lusers.com.ar/ work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://gcoop.com.ar/ 2B82 A38D 1BA5 847A A74D 6C34 6AB7 9ED6 C8FD F9C1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Misuse of Debian logo for City Tourism
Cyril Brulebois wrote: Will you please respond to my E-Mail ASAP. I am curious as to whether this promotion, for self-profit, is a valid use. I personally do not like the Debian GNU/Linux Logo being used for the profit, and the profit of a city. One, that I will admit, lacks anything interesting. Anyway, http://www.debian.org/logos/ has licensing info for both logos, which probably will answer your question? quoting http://www.debian.org/logos/: Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest *This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to the Debian project*, but does not indicate endorsement by the project. In this case this is not happening, since the commercial is about something not even related with Debian or computers. Even Though IANADD or a /lawyer/, I believe they should remove the Debian logo from their something-they're-advertising. Regards, Mauro -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lusers.com.ar/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mined copyright with no copyright
Hi All, I'm returning with this issue :) (was busy with studies) Well, the last time i contacted Thomas Wolff about this and he replied with this: --- Hi Mauro, I confirm there was no copyright notice or file attached, just a doc file with the line Author: Michiel Huisjes. near the top. There is some discussion about Minix license to be found on the web, e.g. http://minix1.woodhull.com/faq/mxlicense.html but I would actually even assume that mined is not really part of the operating system but rather a tool written for it. If it is seems to be helpful, I could include a copy of that BSD-like copyright text somewhere in the source subdirectory, maybe included in the mined.doc file, but I wouldn't like to place it into the main directory so other distributions might see a conflict to the GPL and complain in turn... I hope this is sufficient to get a pass from the lawyer, Best regards, Thomas --- If you think this is fine, this package would be ready to be uploaded asap. So i would really like to read your opinions once again :) Regards, Mauro -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK Version: 3.12 GCM/O d-dpu$ s-:- a--a+++$ C+++ LU P+ L++ E W+++ N !o K w O !M !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5– X R tv++ b- DI D++ G+ e h!h-- rr+++ y+ END GEEK CODE BLOCK
mined copyright with no copyright
Hi all, I intended to do a qa upload to fix some bugs on the package mined [0] which is orphaned[1], and i got a lintian warning about the file debian/copyright where it has no copyright holder, when i asked to the upstream maintainer of this issue he answered me this [2] also i asked in comp.os.minix [3] about mined and got no answer so far btw, i've seen lots of packages [4] with this lintian warning too, and doesn't seem to be a big problem.. what should i do in this case? [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=mined;dist=unstable [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=382750 [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2008/03/msg00062.html [3] http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.minix/browse_thread/thread/39c779aefa96e947/41ffe7e1ada839ec#41ffe7e1ada839ec [4] http://lintian.debian.org/reports/tags/copyright-without-copyright-notice.html Regards, Mauro Lizaur -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK Version: 3.12 GCM/O d-dpu$ s-:- a--a+++$ C+++ LU P+ L++ E W+++ N !o K w O !M !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5– X R tv++ b- DI D++ G+ e h!h-- rr+++ y+ END GEEK CODE BLOCK
Re: mined copyright with no copyright
Hi All, I got a reply to the post on comp.os.minix about mined: --- Jan-Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I remember Michiel writing it. In the Netherlands you don't need to claim copyright, it comes from writing it. However in this case, Andy payed (100 guilders if I remember correctly) for mined, so that would make it a work for hire. Both the Dutch and the US law (and probably most also the laws in other countries) would put the Copyright with Andy. E-mail him to make sure: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Most probably mined is FreeBSD style licensed, but I am not sure. Regards. --- Well, that's all for now. I'll send an email to Andy Tanenbaum to see if i can get an answer about this package. Regards, Mauro -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK Version: 3.12 GCM/O d-dpu$ s-:- a--a+++$ C+++ LU P+ L++ E W+++ N !o K w O !M !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5– X R tv++ b- DI D++ G+ e h!h-- rr+++ y+ END GEEK CODE BLOCK
Tshirt with the official logo
Hello there, I was looking for a tshirt and i saw this one [1] which has the official logo and afaik, these shirts just can be given as a pack with debian products or made by a DD (but can't be sold, though) (How) Should i ask politely to the people running this site/shop to remove the tshirt? Any advices would be great. i dont really want to send them an email with something like hey remove that tshirt because i say so ;) Regards, Mauro [1] http://ex-it.com.ar/geek/catalogo/Debian_%5B2%5D.html -- BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK Version: 3.12 GCM/O d-dpu$ s-:- a--a+++$ C+++ LU P+ L++ E W+++ N !o K w O !M !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5– X R tv++ b- DI D++ G+ e h!h-- rr+++ y+ END GEEK CODE BLOCK
ttf-breip with SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE
Hello There, I recently adopted and packaged the font ttf-breip which is already on the debian repositories on the main section. My sponsor was in doubt about the licence of the font (SIL), and double-checked if its dsfg-free or not with other DD's and some of them told her it was free and some told her that it wasn't free. Also i've read a thread on this mailing list about the gentium font with the same license [1], but i still have no answers about this font and its license. So should the ttf-breip font keep in main or should be moved to non-free? Sorry for my bad english, i hope you understand what i am asking here [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/11/msg00314.html Thanks, Mauro -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
