On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 01:41:37AM +, Benjamin A'Lee wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:38:25PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
[...]
However, when starting irrecord, it says:
IMPORTANT: The license of the config files created by this program requires
that you send them to the author. If you
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 12:44:11AM -0400, Maykel Moya wrote:
Today I attended at 'I Taller de Software Libre' in the most important
university here in Cuba. Some guys there are creating a Distro optimized
for our country, and they are taking Gentoo as base.
In their talk
Scripsit Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Even when the work is not copyrightable? (eg header files :-)
It is false that header files are not copyrightable.
--
Henning Makholm What has it got in its pocketses?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 09:55:40AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
'Worse' is purely a matter of perspective. There's irony here...
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 05:31:27AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
No, there isn't. It's very simple. You called it a perversion,
which means you think it's worse.
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 11:16:29AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 09:55:40AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
'Worse' is purely a matter of perspective. There's irony here...
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 05:31:27AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
No, there isn't. It's very
On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 12:21 +0200, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I think it is in the spirit of the Creative Commons licenses not to
require a transparent copy for editing.
That's true. However, for a work to be DFSG-free, source code must be
supplied.
Therefore, I think it would be wrong to fix
Scripsit Evan Prodromou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 12:21 +0200, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I think it is in the spirit of the Creative Commons licenses not to
require a transparent copy for editing.
That's true. However, for a work to be DFSG-free, source code must be
supplied.
On Saturday 26 March 2005 01:01 am, Josh Triplett wrote:
To the best of my knowledge (IANAL), there is no issue with someone in
Cuba or another embargoed country downloading Debian from
ftp.xx.debian.org, for values of xx != us or probably a few others.
Key issue here: it is *not* illegal to
Sean Kellogg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Um, yeah, I'm not a lawyer either... but I play one at school, and I
wouldn't
be so sure about that. While Cuba/US relations are pretty bad, Cuba does
have relationships with other European nations. As part of the compromise
between the US and
I apologize to be jumping in this at such a late stage. :)
quote who=Evan Prodromou date=2005-03-18 14:28:24 -0500
Hi, everyone. At long last, I've made some final revisions to the draft
summary of the Creative Commons 2.0 licenses. The main changes have
been:
* Additional phrasing
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 10:54:54PM +0100, Michael Below wrote:
Sean Kellogg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Um, yeah, I'm not a lawyer either... but I play one at school, and I
wouldn't
be so sure about that. While Cuba/US relations are pretty bad, Cuba does
have relationships with other
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:49:34 +0100 (MET) Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
From: Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
I don't think it's forbidding to remove the code: it's merely
forbidding to drop a feature.
You could reimplement it in a better (or even worse) way, but you
must support
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:27:57 -0500 Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
[anti-DRM clause]
In terms of suggesting a textual fix, how about:
You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
publicly digitally perform the Work with any technological measures
that control access or use of
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:27:57 -0500 Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
[anti-DRM clause]
In terms of suggesting a textual fix, how about:
You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
publicly digitally perform the Work with any technological measures
that control access
14 matches
Mail list logo
