Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We require that licenses don't discriminate against fields
of endeavor, but we have never considered the right to
distribute this free software in a non-free fashion a field of
endeavor.
I'm not convinced that using DRM/DRRT/technical measures is
necessarily a
Joe Smith wrote:
Dominik Margraf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I have come across with the Wild Magic library, which has its own
license and has not been debianized to date. Here is the link to the
license agreement:
Olivier Mascia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
First, thanks for your time spent around these questions. [...]
Thanks for considering the responses.
College, as used here (probably very mistakenly in english), means an =20=
implied 'group', a 'collection' of multiple people. The idea is that =20
'Authors'
Hi, Milan,
[Yet another cross-post to debian-legal, whose comments are needed at
the lower part of this mail. Thanks]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Damyan Ivanov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes. If possible, I intend to convince everyone to dual license FR under
GPL and someting else.
How? If
El jueves, 23 de marzo de 2006 a las 15:55:55 +0200, Damyan Ivanov escribía:
1. allow anyone to download, copy and redistribute FR source as it is.
2. if someone makes modifications for his own use, he is not obligated
to publish them
3. if someone makes modifications and makes executable
Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
1. allow anyone to download, copy and redistribute FR source as it is.
2. if someone makes modifications for his own use, he is not obligated
to publish them
3. if someone makes modifications and makes executable version
available, he must make the modifications available to
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Milan Babuskov wrote:
Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
1. allow anyone to download, copy and redistribute FR source as it is.
2. if someone makes modifications for his own use, he is not obligated
to publish them
3. if someone makes modifications and makes executable version
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:19:52 +0100 Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Francesco Poli [Tue, Mar 21 2006, 12:18:37AM]:
[...]
I used to hope that ignoring upstream insane statements doesn't
include ignoring DFSG-freeness issues with the package, though!!
:-(
Relax. Let's expect an
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 11:36:11 + MJ Ray wrote:
Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm puzzled: how can you say that Bob had no part in the *derived*
work?
He took no part in creating the new work from it.
That means he's not a co-author of the *derived* work, but, nonetheless,
he is the
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:38:48 +0100 Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Mercredi 22 Mars 2006 01:13, Francesco Poli a écrit :
[...]
It seems that I must find another place to have my project hosted...
Sourceforge provides services by running proprietary tools: I don't
want to get used to something
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 07:47:26 +0100 Yorick Cool wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 11:38:05PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
I'm puzzled: how can you say that Bob had no part in the *derived*
work?
His part was drawing the desk, that was later reused in the derived
work!
Actually, in
Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:19:52 +0100 Eduard Bloch wrote:
Don't count much on dvdrtools, it has no active upstream at all (no, I
don't mean the guys whoes only heroic act was the replacement of the
Schilly build system with autodev-stuff).
That's a
On 3/23/06, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We require that licenses don't discriminate against fields
of endeavor, but we have never considered the right to
distribute this free software in a non-free fashion a field of
endeavor.
I'm not convinced that
13 matches
Mail list logo
