On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:24:35AM -0500, Daniel Carrera wrote:
The license doesn't say that the name must be prominent. It says that it
must be at least as prominent as other credit. Last week I asked the
cc-community list if I could just have an appendix titled contributors
and put
Andrew Suffield wrote:
The third justification refers to the trademark notice on the license's
website where it is not obvious if this notice is part of the license.
I'm pretty sure the trademarrk notice is not part of the license.
So were we (expecting this to be a trivial bug which
Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
So were we (expecting this to be a trivial bug which would be rapidly
corrected), but when they were asked we got a non-response and it
hasn't been fixed *years later*, which made us rather less sure.
Alright, let me have a go
Josselin Mouette wrote:
BitTorrent 4.0 is distributed under a new license of its own.
Section 6 of the preamble states:
6. If you sublicense the Licensed Product or Derivative Works, you
may charge fees for warranty or support, or for accepting indemnity or
liability obligations to your
Le mercredi 09 mars 2005 10:01 -0800, Josh Triplett a crit :
The issues I see related to Freeness are:
* The requirement to keep source code available for 12 months, even if
you are no longer distributing the binary, and even if you distributed
the source code along with the binary.
I
Hello all,
I just had a thought, regarding the CC-BY license. It looks like the
license is essentially free, except that there are some vague points
that would allow it to be misused.
Can this be fixed by just adding a clarification letter? What I mean is,
I publish something using the CC-BY
Daniel Carrera wrote:
In any event, would you (Debian-legal) help me draft a short and simple
letter that would clarify away the problems?
How's this? :
LICENSE CLARIFICATION
This is how we, at OOoAuthors, interpret the Creative Commons
Attribution license, used for our work:
(*)
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:44:57PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Philipp Kern wrote:
could you please link me to a FAQ about legal concerns which could come
up when using the GPL?
I think you are looking for
http://gnu.hands.com/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatIsCompatible
or maybe a nearby question.
Daniel Carrera wrote:
LICENSE CLARIFICATION
[...]
(*) The license does not interfere with fair-use rights. For
example, you can always quote from our work and attribute the text.
To me this seems unnecessary; section 2 of the CC-BY licence is:
2. Fair Use Rights. Nothing in this
MJ Ray wrote:
The letter could just clarify that (1) the author names don't have to
be prominent,
That would probably work.
:-)
(2) the license does not interfere with fair-use rights
(e.g. quoting you on a bibliography)
Is this trying to reverse the author name purge condition?
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* The requirement to maintain a LEGAL file.
I don't think this one is really a problem; it's similar to the GPL
saying you must mark your modifications as such.
This LEGAL file doesn't seem to say that we have to leave the
contents we got untouched,
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 16:49:12 -0500 Daniel Carrera wrote:
This is how we, at OOoAuthors, interpret the Creative Commons
Attribution license, used for our work:
Are you, as a copyright holder, considering to use a CC license?
I would recommend you to choose a clearly DFSG-free and urge your
Francesco Poli wrote:
Are you, as a copyright holder, considering to use a CC license?
Yes.
I would recommend you to choose a clearly DFSG-free and urge your
fellows to do the same.
We also want to put our work on the OpenOffice.org website. And OOo has a
rather limited set of options. For
Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But those cases are covered by Fair Use rights. You are always allowed to
say Jeremy said ... :) or to put someone's work (and name) on a
bibliography, or a footnote. Those are all fair use.
Under English law, I'm only allowed to say Daniel wrote ...
MJ Ray wrote:
Under English law, I'm only allowed to say Daniel wrote ...
and include a chunk of copyrighted material within limited
parameters called fair dealing.
How do you deal with bibliographies? What about saying Ray doesn't like
Lessig? There *has* to be room for more than just Ray
15 matches
Mail list logo
