[Disclaimer: The below are statements of general law. If
you need legal advice, see an attorney. I am licensed to
practice in the District of Columbia and no other
jurisdiction.] IAAL
Interesting thread, I'm going to step through a few points
that caught my eye--hope they may be useful
Hello James Miller,
I think I had compiled a user friendly index comparing some various
jurisdictions a couple years ago I could dig up if it's useful to you
guys.
I have also been following this discussion with interest. I'm attempting
to understand the copyright laws of the various
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:09:03AM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
DFSG-free means that it can be included in Debian, maintained by our
maintainers and used by our users.
Now you're being silly. Surely
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:36:28PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I pulled it out of my files and reread it; the FSF's side of the
agreement is a lot weaker than I remembered. The actual text is
[...]
Not one word about redistribution of modifications. I don't think
I have a leg to stand on
Thank you for your interest in the Debian Project!
Due to the fact that we receive a lot of similar requests, we were
forced to set up an automatic reply mechanism to reduce our workload
and to actually be able to answer real requests again. It would
simply cost us too much time to answer each
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 07:34:26PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Substantial modifications are permitted, and may be distributed, at
which point the modifier must either pay to ABC Software Inc the sum
of USD 1,000 for each occurrence of
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:20:33AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:14:30AM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 04:53:03PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 04:00:43PM -0500, Elizabeth Barham wrote:
But, however, I have not had seen anything in writing specifically
stating that the data is public domain and I received no reply when I
asked them the license of the data via the email address on the
above-cited webpage.
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:40:46PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 20:17, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
They are also not enforceable in the US.
Can you please provide a citation for this? I've never been able to come
up with one.
I found one case that *might* be
Branden writes:
United States Code, Title 17, Chapter 1:
[ ...]
If you have good reason to believe that the data in question was
prepared by the U.S. government, then the material cannot be
copyrighted.
If you do make such a determination, I would go ahead and target the
package for
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 11:43:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
(a) [...] Commercial speech that is not false or deceptive and does not
concern unlawful activities may be restricted only in the service of a
substantial governmental interest, and only through means that directly
advance that
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 20:17, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
They are also not enforceable in the US.
Can you please provide a citation for this? I've never been able to come
up with one.
This is what I know from Eben Moglen; I would ask him if
They are also not enforceable in the US.
Can you please provide a citation for this? I've never been able to come
up with one.
This is what I know from Eben Moglen; I would ask him if he can give
you more exact citations. Also maybe look at the briefs that ATT
filed in the BSD v.
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 02:25:38PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 11:43:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
(a) [...] Commercial speech that is not false or deceptive and does not
concern unlawful activities may be restricted only in the service of a
substantial
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 10:19:45AM -0500, Debian Press Team wrote:
Thank you for your interest in the Debian Project!
Debian Press Team,
Please don't spam the Debian Legal Team.
Thanks!
--
G. Branden Robinson| The only way to get rid of a
Debian GNU/Linux
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 11:17:40AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200304/msg00294.html
While I agree with that post in general, I don't think it's germane to
the case of PHP-Nuke. The PHP-Nuke author claims that the requirement
to
On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:30:15AM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
All the XML scores in the world will not allow me to
recreate a particular sound recording (made with real live musicians,
in the case it contains music). Therefore, an XML score is not
source.
All the C code in the
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 07:02:18AM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
I would be interested in an answer to the question in my last message,
namely how to distinguish between this ABC-DFL and licenses that
require other sorts of consideration before modification.
The issue is what it costs you,
Greg Pomerantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They are also not enforceable in the US.
Can you please provide a citation for this? I've never been able to come
up with one.
This is what I know from Eben Moglen; I would ask him if he can give
you more exact citations. Also maybe
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would not be surprised to have a court hold that restricted in this
instance applies solely to government restrictions, and that contractual
restrictions (such as agreeing to a license) are still permissible, since
nobody forced the company to agree to
20 matches
Mail list logo
