Mateusz Jończyk writes (Legality of analysing DSDT table):
I am working on some bug in Linux kernel that is probably somehow
related to ACPI. Would it be legal if a bug reporter in India sent
me his DSDT table and I would then decompile and analyse it?
You seem to be in Poland. I think there
Riley Baird writes (Re: Zend Engine License):
On 02/08/14 16:30, MJ Ray wrote:
I notice that Zend framework seems to be under a BSD style licence, without
that sort of clause.
It is in the php5 package. Here is the d/copyright file:
Georg Pfeiffer writes (Translated License):
We intend to give the whole project a default license wich is a german
translation of the MIT license [2]. The english text is included. Our
intention is, that the german text shall be more clear and more
convenient to german project members
Charles Plessy writes (Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license):
I think that it is important that a few of the ‘some members’ would
identify themselves in support for that request, and explain what
they would do if the worries expressed below turned out to be true.
At the moment people are
Francesco Poli writes (Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license):
On Fri, 1 Aug 2014 16:59:11 +0100 Ian Jackson wrote:
Paragraph 6 of the main licence text requires this notice:
This product includes PHP software, freely available from
http://www.php.net/software/.
I would also
(-project dropped from the CC)
MJ Ray writes (Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license):
Secondly, unless it says otherwise, a naming restriction in a
copyright licence doesn't permit honest source attribution and all
the other nominative and fair uses that a trademark would. This is
more of a
Draft question for SFLC:
Some members of the Debian project have some concerns about the PHP
licence. These worries are dismissed by other members and by relevant
upstreams. We would like some advice.
We are concerned here with the PHP 3.01 Licences, which can be
found here:
Ian Jackson writes (PHP licence SFLC questions draft v3):
Some members of the Debian project have some concerns about the PHP
licence. These worries are dismissed by other members and by relevant
upstreams. We would like some advice.
We are concerned here with the PHP 3.01 Licences, which
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
There is nothing wrong with a copyright licence in German.
Thank you very much for this clear position, wich seemed to be mine only
for discouraging long times :D
My german combattants bothered, our german license would be estimated
non-free
Georg Pfeiffer writes (Re: Translated License):
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
There is nothing wrong with a copyright licence in German.
Thank you very much for this clear position, wich seemed to be mine only
for discouraging long times :D
My german combattants
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
We make our own decisions.
Thats why I love it.
:)
Georg
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On 11 July 2014 16:20:45 CEST, Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se
wrote:
Standardization bodies tend to want to not have random
people making random changes to their standardization documents that
would create incompatible versions of the standards. The documentation
licenses used by
On 4 August 2014 13:26:11 GMT+01:00, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
(-project dropped from the CC)
MJ Ray writes (Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license):
Secondly, unless it says otherwise, a naming restriction in a
copyright licence doesn't permit honest source
13 matches
Mail list logo
