Package: spread
Severity: serious
3. All advertising materials (including web pages) mentioning
features or use of this software, or software that uses this software,
must display the following acknowledgment: This product uses software
developed by Spread Concepts LLC for use in the Spread
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 08:50:10AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
It's due to some recent and inconveniently timed personal events
rather than *anything* within Debian, but I'm going to be reducing my
involvement considerably. I'm sure people who have no insight into my
life will claim
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
)
the work is not licensed in a manner that restricts transfer of
ownership - neither of which are the case here].
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
source for a period of three years or
longer. And you've got no way to guarantee that the site will be there
for that long.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
become more or less irrelevant these days (as
compared to their old state of mostly irrelevant).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
; 3.0
and later should be fine, when they're released (2.x never will be).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
wrote a license then it's a good bet that it's not a free license.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
from you morons
my lurkers will post round my throne.
Lurkers etc.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 11:08:03PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately the QPL is not a free license (although the
Fortunately, most people disagree
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 09:58:17PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 01:50:54AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
The source code for the documentation is embedded as comments in the
program source code, in a doxygen-like way.
Trolltech has not, to my knowledge
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 09:34:52PM -0500, Brian Nelson wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 11:25:35AM -0500, Brian Nelson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Trolltech releases the Open Source Edition of Qt
under the GPL. The complete package
. This *was* intentional.
The GPL's definition of 'source' is approximately 'whatever you need
in order to modify the program' translated into legalese. It is based
on the FSF's four freedoms, not some notion of 'reality'.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
be for them to release the html documentation
under a more permissive license. Shouldn't be too hard to get one of
those done.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 03:51:23PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 06 décembre 2005 à 18:55 +, Andrew Suffield a écrit :
main, definitely. There is a thriving community of developers of free
gameboy games intended to run on these emulators. Don't ask me why, it
makes no sense
rules nor
attempting to abuse them).
If you think about substantial non-infringing usage then you're not
too far from the mark.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
($500k and/or
5 year jail term limit for the first one). Talk about overkill.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
doesn't (nobody is sure what this means in practical
terms, ambiguity abounds).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
)
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
that uses
it. This really isn't difficult.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
could try asking Sun if this
is okay but they'll probably say no just out of habit. They are
*monumentally* proprietary about Java - Sun are determined to retain
absolute control over it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:06:00AM +0200, Claus F?rber wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:52:00PM +0200, Claus F?rber wrote:
So one of the assumptions made above is wrong.
The one where you assumed that dynamic linking was relevent. I've
it to be.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
too tired to keep on smacking them down.
Anything that shows up as a duplicate later will also get moved into
standard/.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
; if it works out reasonably well
then I'll come up with more automation for next time (it's painfully
time-consuming to paste this stuff together from the archives but gets
the job done sooner than something complex involving mbox-processing
on master).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
you credit the author
in some reasonable manner *of your own choice* are generally free.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
hardly a surprise.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:54:33AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's what I have in mind:
http://people.debian.org/~asuffield/licenses/cddl/summary.html
It looks a comprehensive minute apart from repeated points, but
some of the stock language needs
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 07:28:46PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
[License follows as inline MIME foo]
html2text is a piece of crap.
At the same time, I'd like to experiment with an idea I've been toying
with for a slightly more (informally) directed approach to license
analysis, that should
obtained extradition treaties for it and is using
them. I've lost my reference on that one, sorry.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
that it will be free soon. I'm not willing to
defend the position though. And it sounds like it's not an issue any
more.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
, no.
There's a few statutes on the books around the place which say This
applies to [...] unless waived by both parties and similar stuff.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
at any point. When you filed
in a UK court to attempt to enforce the US judgement, I would raise
the defence that the claim was nonsense.
If you bring choice-of-venue into the picture, it becomes rather more
murky.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:52:00PM +0200, Claus F?rber wrote:
So one of the assumptions made above is wrong.
The one where you assumed that dynamic linking was relevent. I've been
saying that all along.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
it's broken somewhere. Figuring
out where is left as an exercise for the students. I really don't care
about the details.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
at this.
I am acutely disinterested in that debate because it's long and
boring, but there's a lot of law professors who like it and think that
the GPL does work. I suggest you go argue with them instead.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 03:56:47PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 08:44:39PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 12:44:56PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Henning Makholm writes:
A bicycle trip to my local courthouse: DKK 2, including write-offs
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
is different.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
with the following slight modifications:
Which constitutes a trademark violation at the very least (it's not
the CDDL any more) and quite probably a copyright one (the CDDL isn't
modifiable).
Yeesh.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
, the system is patch(1). With minimal
extra effort I can ensure that this happens only at execution
time, and that no copies are stored.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 02:27:45PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote:
** Andrew Suffield ::
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 01:22:07PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es
wrote:
3.3. it seems to me that it's absurd to think, for instance,
that Debian cannot dynamic link a GPLd program
MIME foo]
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
******** CCOOMMMMOONN DDEEVVEELLOOPPMMEENNTT
AANNDD DDIISSTTRRIIBBUUTTIIOONN LLIIC
then you'll have to come up with
more than that.
There's an awful lot of lawyers and law professors who think that the
GPL works. Go start by arguing with them.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 10:36:19AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
It's never been seriously tested in court.
What's to test? It's just method of licensing a slew of patents.
The legitimacy of their claimed patents.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 11:53:57AM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
On Thursday 08 September 2005 11:38 am, Andrew Suffield wrote:
There's an awful lot of lawyers and law professors who think that the
GPL works. Go start by arguing with them.
Based on my readings of law review articles
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
be the same ones that think free
software can't work. Generally not worth arguing with them.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
aren't. For those who don't know, a
module is in essence a midi file with embedded instrument samples.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
any existing license, so
you should really contact them regardless (this is an untested legal
theory which has become popular over there in recent years).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
to it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
already had that GR. You lost, badly.
Oh, and that whole creative commons mob. Yeah. Real few people.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital
the license permits you to run a copy on your computer. 'similar'
doesn't really mean anything when talking about licenses.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
are both
structured differently.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
If there is no other sensible way to write the function then it's not
copyrightable. But be pretty damned sure of that before taking
advantage of it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
with the MIT license unless you've got a *really* good reason not
to. If you want a CC license, sit and wait, this will be fixed
sometime. Hopefully by the end of the year.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
correctly. There is
also a bug report about this: #313137.
What's debian-legal's view on this?
I don't believe there have ever been any significant objections to
this notion. But I'm not willing to argue in its defense.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http
provided by Sun. You're not even allowed
to stuff the installer inside a .deb package. Blackdown had to get
explicit permission from Sun to distribute their version.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
the time.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 05:20:40PM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
On Saturday 30 July 2005 04:38 pm, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 08:55:33AM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
Hmm... Personally, I'm not convinced that venue clauses are non-free.
But if they are willing to drop
the others). I
believe this was actually an issue on one occasion, although I don't
recall the details. (Obviously, the GPL doesn't require you provide
source for three years).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
think that the phrasing of complex license clauses should be done by
lawyers. We don't need another repeat of the Artistic debacle.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 09:19:15AM -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Anyway, the person who recombines the film and track, in the
case of dynamic linking, is the *USER*, in the process of using the
program, and copyrights protection do not apply
time to propose a GR to do a s/program/work/ in the DFSG.
Since IANADD, I cannot propose GRs, but I hope that some DDs will help.
It's not quite that simple; you can't just change that bit alone. I'm
working on something here. More on this later.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 08:04:40AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
Andrew Suffield writes:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 02:42:35PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote:
Static linking can *not* create a derived work, because it is an
automatic process. Poster case: is hello, generated from
into this ridiculous word game in the first place.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
itself doesn't change.
Yeah, as far as the above goes.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
but
some people had difficulty understanding this and we got into
pointless debates because of it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
the DFSG
wasn't changed, it was for one reason and one reason alone:
Updating the SC took quite enough of my time, I didn't want to do the
DFSG as well right then.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
remove the requirement to do so. However, that
just felt too much like going against the gist of the policy, so I chose not
to do that.
Yes, that wouldn't really benefit anybody.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
, because lots of RFCs aren't
presently distributable at all - but it's not a license to modify, so that's
not very useful.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
of dealing
with a package where upstream are untrustworthy lying bastards.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
than the GPL in this respect which was still free, to my knowledge -
that doesn't mean it *can't* exist, but it probably doesn't).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:17:42PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 10:06:48PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 04:20:05PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
You've got a problem with this one, because licenses can be combined
conjunctively and disjunctively. So
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 12:50:03AM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
On Thursday 09 June 2005 11:10 pm, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Andrew Suffield wrote:
The primary threat is not from the heirs (although that is a threat,
and you don't have control over all your heirs - your parents
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:22:59PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:17:42PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 10:06:48PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 04:20:05PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
You've got a problem with this one
it
as an RFC, which is often inappropriate, and would be a non-free submit to
upstream requirement in any case).
Notably, you can't include any text from them in programs you
write. Including example code.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
and not a
lawyer.
Lawyers are pretty silly people, yes.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
stuff
like that.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Yeah, crosspost to -legal from a list that moderates non-subscriber
mails, great plan.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
advertising clause disaster all over again...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
it's not free does not make
it non-free.
But Marco d'Itri defending it means it probably is non-free. Funny how
that works.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:27:54PM +0200, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 05:03:09AM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
Note: I am replying only to -legal for now, someone with more
firm knowledge than either me or Mr. Edwards should post
.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
. Law is not vague fluff, it's
a specific language, and you suck at it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
or product
documentation.
Vague. What's 'usage', 'accessible', and 'end user'? Not that it matters, given
#4.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description
for our purposes.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
these
restrictions cannot be allowed.
I think a better example would be the demonstration
implementation of a protocol included with a standards
document.
Java.
It's precisely the reason Sun use.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org
1 - 100 of 685 matches
Mail list logo
