On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:22:27AM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
Personally, I don't like it. Use of DFSG4 (beyond The license
may require... a different name) isn't really encouraged, and if
one can't distributed modified binaries because there are no
binaries, the software feels very
* Tore Anderson
I would like to have the list members' opinion on the following
license, which is about to be applied to the data files of an
old adventure game:
~~~
Preamble:
Basically, give this game away, share it with your friends.
Don't remove this Readme, or
On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 08:05, Tore Anderson wrote:
As a few has pointed out, this does not allow for modifying and
redistributing modified versions. I believe the only chance I have
to make the copyright holder accept such a clause, would be through
making it pass DFSG clause 4.
Hi,
I would like to have the list members' opinion on the following
license, which is about to be applied to the data files of an old
adventure game:
~~~
Preamble:
Basically, give this game away, share it with your friends. Don't
remove this Readme, or pretend you wrote it. You can
Tore Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I would like to have the list members' opinion on the following
license, which is about to be applied to the data files of an old
adventure game:
It's non-free. There's no permission to create a derivative work, or
to distribute such a
Tore Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I would like to have the list members' opinion on the following
license, which is about to be applied to the data files of an old
adventure game:
[snip]
At first I had my doubts about paragraph 3, but after having read
the Artistic
* Tore Anderson
At first I had my doubts about paragraph 3, but after having
read the Artistic license, whose paragraph 5 involves the same
restriction while still being DFSG-free, I would assume this is
acceptable for inclusion in main. But do comment, legalese is
not one
On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 15:15, Tore Anderson wrote:
* You are permitted to modify the game as you like, and also distribute
such versions under the same license as the original work, if they are
clearly marked as being modified versions.
..would that be okay? (Suggestions on how to
* Tore Anderson
* You are permitted to modify the game as you like, and also
distribute such versions under the same license as the original
work, if they are clearly marked as being modified versions.
* Joe Wreschnig
The GNU GPL version 2 has a clause that words this very well.
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:08:37PM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
may be sold), but using it in things like commercial adventure game
collections without asking is just playing dirty.
I'm fairly sure that the license does not actually accomplish
this. Presumably it refers to clause 3:
3) You
On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 18:44, Tore Anderson wrote:
Well, it's not really a source+binary distribution, more general
data (compare it with a jpeg wallpaper, for instance). So I don't
really see any reason to make the distinction. Indeed, the reason why
upstream doesn't use the Artistic
* Joe Wreschnig
You can GPL a JPEG, or a PDF, or whatever.
Straying a bit off topic now, but this isn't as trivial as it you
make it sound (for JPEG's, at least). It's almost a certainty that
the preferred modifiable form of a digitally created image isn't a JPEG,
but a format specific
12 matches
Mail list logo
