Re: DomainKeys license(s)

2006-08-24 Thread Magnus Holmgren
On Thursday 27 July 2006 12:15, Magnus Holmgren took the opportunity to say: On Tuesday 20 June 2006 18:43, Magnus Holmgren took the opportunity to write: On Saturday 17 June 2006 23:02, Joe Smith took the opportunity to write: Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote What about the

Re: DomainKeys license(s)

2006-08-24 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since DFSG apparently (according to the recent discussion) only deals with copyright and restrictions imposed by the copyright owner, I assume that uploading the independently developed Perl packages, libmail-domainkeys-perl and libmail-dkim-perl, should be possible.

Re: Bug#203211: Software patents and Debian

2006-08-24 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2006-08-18 21:12:59, schrieb Ben Finney: Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: since you can obtaine at any moments a legal individual licence Really? For any patent, from whomever holds it, in any jurisdiction, Yes, I was contacting several of them and all individual licences are

Re: Bug#203211: Software patents and Debian

2006-08-24 Thread Matthew Garrett
Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is now, how does Ubuntu has gotten the Licence? (Yes I know, Mark is realy rich) It hasn't. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Public draft -- news and questions

2006-08-24 Thread MJ Ray
Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:37:08 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:53:57PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: AFAICT, CC seems to interpret the clause this way, since the explicit parallel distribution proviso was *removed* because of

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Public draft -- news and questions

2006-08-24 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:25:31 +0200 Evan Prodromou wrote: [...] Creative Commons did what we recommended here: http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary That is, they limited the removal requirements only to authorship credits. I think the general consensus was that it's OK to request

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Public draft -- news and questions

2006-08-24 Thread Francesco Poli
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:29:34 -0400 Michael Poole wrote: Francesco Poli writes: [...] Well, it prohibits an entire class of derivative works: the ones that (accurately) credit the author of the original work! The Berne Convention (section 6bis), and droit d'auteur regimes even before

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Public draft -- news and questions

2006-08-24 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:47:15 +0200 Evan Prodromou wrote: Francesco Poli wrote: Well, it prohibits an entire class of derivative works: the ones that (accurately) credit the author of the original work! As I said elsewhere: I can release an annotate version of a CC-licensed novel, but I

Re: DomainKeys license(s)

2006-08-24 Thread Ben Finney
Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since DFSG apparently (according to the recent discussion) only deals with copyright and restrictions imposed by the copyright owner It's quite apparent from reading the DFSG that there's no such limitation. The DFSG in particular are concerned with

Re: Licensing problems with appWeb

2006-08-24 Thread Kari Pahula
I felt that it would be better to bring this to debian-legal. For reference, this is about AppWeb, http://www.appwebserver.org/. On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:52:07AM -0700, mob wrote: I wanted to follow up and make sure you received my responses to your email. I did. Sorry, I've been deferring

AutoNotify: Mail System Error - Returned Mail

2006-08-24 Thread mailadm
Your message has been isolated because it contains either an executable or zipped file. Many executable and zipped files sent by email are viruses. Your message will be examined by NSW Department of Primary Industries Staff and released if it is considered work related. Do not resend the

Re: DomainKeys license(s)

2006-08-24 Thread Stephen Gran
This one time, at band camp, Ben Finney said: Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since DFSG apparently (according to the recent discussion) only deals with copyright and restrictions imposed by the copyright owner It's quite apparent from reading the DFSG that there's no such

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Public draft -- news and questions

2006-08-24 Thread Stephen Gran
This one time, at band camp, Francesco Poli said: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:25:31 +0200 Evan Prodromou wrote: Considering that we think it's OK for the author to request to be /added/ to the authorship credits, Let me understand this better, because I cannot remember having discussed it

Artwork in sourceforge.net pages

2006-08-24 Thread Javier Serrano Polo
Hi. I've made a modified version of an icon that shows on a sourceforge.net page (http://timidity.sourceforge.net/). The program is GPL but that icon isn't distributed with the tarball. Before bugging again who I suppose is the copyright holder, I've read the sourceforge's terms of use and got to

RE: Licensing problems with appWeb

2006-08-24 Thread mob
Kari, Thanks for your detailed response. Comments below -Original Message- From: Kari Pahula [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 4:30 PM To: mob Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; debian-legal@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Licensing problems with appWeb I felt that it