On Jan 26, 2008 2:52 PM, Michael Below [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wondering: Is there a legal system on earth that would accept a
disclaimer like TINLA?
Perhaps first of all we need to ask if there is a legal system on
earth that would regard contributing to this mailing list as
constituting
On Jan 28, 2008 12:05 AM, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we have named Firefux the modified version of Firefox, I doubt the
Mozilla foundation would have let that pass.
There's various other reasons for that and it wouldn't have been covered
by a prohibition on calling it Firefox or
On Monday 28 January 2008 01:27:54 am John Halton wrote:
Two, this disclaimer tries to force its own judgement onto the legal
system. If the statement you are referring to is legal advice (which is
a question of legal interpretation), you shouldn't be able to define it
away post factum. A
Florian Weimer wrote:
| You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not
| convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains
| in force. You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose
| of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or
FW GPLv3 makes it pretty clear that Dreamhost can take your rights away
So all that effort of writing Free Software and the result is there is
Johnny, sitting at the shell prompt, unable to see the source code
to anything behind it if they decide to close it.
Yes, I find the
Michael Below [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wondering: Is there a legal system on earth that would accept a
disclaimer like TINLA?
I think the long list of acronyms may be a sly dig at certain silly
postings in times past which complained that certain people weren't making
it clear enough that
Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Florian Weimer wrote:
| You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not
| convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains
| in force. You may convey covered works to others for
John Halton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008 12:05 AM, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we have named Firefux the modified version of Firefox, I doubt the
Mozilla foundation would have let that pass.
There's various other reasons for that and it wouldn't have been covered
by
\John Halton\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 9:07 AM, Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My first question would be whether those files would contain sufficient
creative expression to qualify for copyright protection. If they don't
(and I am not sure something like
FW GPLv3 makes it pretty clear that Dreamhost can take your rights away
So all that effort of writing Free Software and the result is there is
Johnny, sitting at the shell prompt, unable to see the source code
to anything behind it if they decide to close it.
Yes, I find the
10 matches
Mail list logo
