On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> Here is a copy/paste of the the legal code for CC0 1.0 Universal for
> -legal regulars to dissect:
I should also point out the human-readable summary:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
CC0 1.0 Universal
No Copyright
This li
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Maximilian Gaß wrote:
> with the recent release of CC0 by Creative Commons, I wonder what your
> opinions on it are about using this for software that might be included in
> Debian?
Since it is meant as a more universal public domain dedication, I'd
expect it woul
Hello d-legal,
with the recent release of CC0 by Creative Commons, I wonder what your
opinions on it are about using this for software that might be included in
Debian?
Regards,
Max
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
there's a dirty little secret that the
others won't tell you. When the
house you want to flip is a Short
Sale or Bank Owned REO
For'eclosure, you'll need 2 things
to get in the game. Proof of Funds
& in many (not all) cases, Transactional
Funding, or what I call 1 Day Dough.
Kellie Brown h
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
> Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > Too often, though, such files are a set of license *terms* only
> > (e.g. the text of the GPL), with no copyright status or explicit
> > *grant* of license. That's not enough for Debian to know the
> > rights of recipients: mere inclusion
* Giacomo A. Catenazzi [090320 10:08]:
> >Too often, though, such files are a set of license *terms* only (e.g.
> >the text of the GPL), with no copyright status or explicit *grant* of
> >license. That's not enough for Debian to know the rights of
> >recipients: mere inclusion of license terms is
Ben Finney wrote:
[note: quotations in random order]
(We're now in ‘debian-legal’ territory; please follow up there.)
Too often, though, such files are a set of license *terms* only (e.g.
the text of the GPL), with no copyright status or explicit *grant* of
license. That's not enough for Deb
7 matches
Mail list logo
