? Followups set.)
[1] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]#1/1
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc/msg/0946381c11c31f74
--
G. Branden Robinson| The Bible is probably the most
Debian GNU/Linux | genocidal book ever written.
[EMAIL
[You didn't honor my M-F-T so I guess this will continue to go to both
lists.]
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 12:29:29PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe your reasoning is faulty, because it is based on incomplete
information. There was more than
Courtesy of Groklaw:
Daniel Wallace's suit against the FSF was dismissed and he has been ordered
to pay the FSF's court costs.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060320201540127
Just thought I'd bring a ray of sunshine into Alexander Terekhov's day.
--
G. Branden Robinson
/GPL_v3_Launch_Comments
--
G. Branden Robinson
Debian Project Leader
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.debian.org/~branden/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.html
[2] http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/lu-13.html
[3] http://gpl-violations.org/news/20050414-fortinet-injunction.html
--
G. Branden Robinson|Build a fire for a man, and he'll
Debian GNU/Linux |be warm for a day. Set a man on
[EMAIL
respectful of the upstream promulgators of the licenses,
is a good reflection on debian-legal and by extension the entire project.
Good work. Don't let the -legal haters get you down.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Psychology is really biology.
Debian GNU/Linux
is a money machine. I find it hard
to believe he'd have published under a pen name if to do so would have
meant exposing himself to claims of fraudulent copyright.
For a more recent example, see the novel _Primary Colors_[1].
[1] http://www.bearcave.com/bookrev/primary_colors.htm
--
G. Branden
important to us than freedom?
[1] http://packages.debian.org/unstable/mail/signify
--
G. Branden Robinson| A fundamentalist is someone who
Debian GNU/Linux | hates sin more than he loves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | virtue.
http://people.debian.org
On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 12:28:05PM -0500, Mark Johnson wrote:
Quoting Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 03:38:01PM -0500, Mark Johnson wrote:
I've been asked to get some sort of review from the free software world of
the new OASIS[1] IPR draft. I tried
are registered by the code. I'm not sure this
is copyrightable.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Good judgement comes from
Debian GNU/Linux | experience; experience comes from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | bad judgement.
http://people.debian.org
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:19:33PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-12 02:46]:
IMO it would have helped if a Debian license arbitration body had been
formally delegated by the DPL, but as we all know, that didn't happen
of the summary).
What is required to move forward on this? Do we *need* to move forward on
this?
[1] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
G. Branden Robinson| I'm a firm believer in not drawing
Debian GNU/Linux | trend lines before you have data
[EMAIL
Package: shermans-aquarium
Version: 2.2.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: violates section 2.2.1 of Debian Policy
As noted on debian-legal on 20 August by Nathanael Nerode,
shermans-aquarium appears to contain non-DFSG-free images files.
It is unclear to me whether these files are even
Package: kaquarium
Version: 1.0-beta-3
Severity: serious
Justification: violation of Debian Policy 2.2.1
As noted on debian-legal on 20 August by Nathanael Nerode, kaquarium
appears to contain non-DFSG-free images files (some of the same ones as
shermans-aquarium).
It is unclear to me whether
enforced software patents
We don't generally seek affirmative evidence that these are the case before
accepting something into main. We simply may decide to remove a package
from main if either of them prove to be false.
--
G. Branden Robinson|Any man who does not realize
in reviewing the document please contact me?
I'll send you the document for a quick review.
Did anyone get in touch with you about this?
--
G. Branden Robinson|It may be difficult to to determine
Debian GNU/Linux |where religious beliefs end and
[EMAIL PROTECTED
, or with the USPTO in the case of trademarks.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Men are born ignorant, not stupid.
Debian GNU/Linux | They are made stupid by education.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Bertrand Russell
http://people.debian.org/~branden
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 10:57:44AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
I suspect Larry Rosen's work was part of the motive for Branden
proposing the contract/ autocrat test for licences.
You're not wrong, but as you imply, he's far from the only offender.
--
G. Branden Robinson
AbiWord
???
Are you trying to make a point about case, or did you mean something else
entirely?
I have long asserted that there is a distinction between work titles and
things like package names and filenames. Do you disagree?
--
G. Branden Robinson|For every credibility gap
://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sup_01_15_10_22.html
--
G. Branden Robinson| I'm not going to waste my precious
Debian GNU/Linux | flash memory with Perl when I can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | do so much more with it.
http://people.debian.org
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:36:47PM +0100, Andrew Saunders wrote:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:08:39 -0500, Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:41:24AM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
However, if you really want to know how DFSG 3 was intended then you
must
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 10:33:26AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 05:36:29PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
Branden Robinson:
Josh Triplett:
The license looks OK to me, with the possible exception that it says
obtaining, using and/or copying
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:59:17AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:36:47PM +0100, Andrew Saunders wrote:
What brought about this change of heart?
[...]
Historical context can be persuasive, but it is not dispositive.
Oh yeah, and lest you think you've caught me out
to on-topic threads, sadly.
[1] http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/
--
G. Branden Robinson|Beware of and eschew pompous
Debian GNU/Linux |prolixity.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Charles A. Beardsley
http://people.debian.org
we have declaring licenses whose
terms we don't understand as DFSG-free.
--
G. Branden Robinson| The Rehnquist Court has never
Debian GNU/Linux | encountered a criminal statute it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | did not like.
http
?
Is this sort of remark intended to be productive, or are you just venting
your spleen because you don't appear to have actually comprehended the
message you cite?
--
G. Branden Robinson|Those who fail to remember the laws
Debian GNU/Linux |of science are condemned
not mean the licensor or copyright holder does so, and in fact we
were unable to determine what the licensor/copyright holder's
interpretation was.
[1] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
--
G. Branden Robinson| It just seems to me that you are
Debian GNU/Linux
in light of what we know now about
the original licensing of the X autoconfig code?
--
G. Branden Robinson|If you make people think they're
Debian GNU/Linux |thinking, they'll love you; but if
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |you really make them
reading comprehension skills. They need to feel important, too.
:-P
--
G. Branden Robinson|It's like I have a shotgun in my
Debian GNU/Linux |mouth, I've got my finger on the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |trigger, and I like the taste of
http
a given copyright.
A license is a license, not a contract.
IMO it would be best to at least contact the upstream authors and make this
request.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Our ignorance is God; what we
Debian GNU/Linux | know is science.
[EMAIL PROTECTED
* as dire as you paint.
Sickeningly there's plenty of precedent for this second scenario. Stay
away from the US; they have delusions of imperialism.
s/delusions/ambitions/
See:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/pnac_030310.html
--
G. Branden Robinson|Half
.html
--
G. Branden Robinson| The more ridiculous a belief
Debian GNU/Linux | system, the higher the probability
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | of its success.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Wayne R. Bartz
signature.asc
Description
and thought of as immature brats by their
peers.
--
G. Branden Robinson|It's extremely difficult to govern
Debian GNU/Linux |when you control all three branches
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |of government.
http://people.debian.org/~branden
://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml
[3] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/05/msg00235.html
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux | // // // / /
[EMAIL PROTECTED
[self-followup]
On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 06:09:08PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
It is, however, worth noting that many subtle variations of the MIT/X11
license exist. That the traditional MIT/X11 license is (by
general consensus, I daresay) DFSG-free, that any license derived from
like to be pulled over by the police for having the wrong skin color.
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 03:56:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
Mr. Markham,
First of all, my apologies for sending this unsolicited mail.
I'm a developer for the Debian Project[1], and in the course of a recent
discussion
On Sun, Jul 25, 2004 at 10:41:47PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DFSG 3 was intended to forbid licensors from placing themselves in a
specially advantaged position. If not, why doesn't DSFG 3 simply say:
The license must allow modifications
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:41:24AM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
DFSG 3 was intended to forbid licensors from placing themselves in a
specially advantaged position. If not, why doesn't DSFG 3 simply say:
The license must allow modifications
specific examples of a policy violation and horrendous bug, all have
been seen in practice.
--
G. Branden Robinson| To stay young requires unceasing
Debian GNU/Linux | cultivation of the ability to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | unlearn
by a particular
licensor on a particular work is almost always the most important
evaluation that Debian has to make.
For further reading:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17409
http://lwn.net/Articles/95006/
--
G. Branden Robinson|It's like I have a shotgun in my
Debian GNU
[self-reply]
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 01:59:59PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
That the FSF regards this as a violation they can overlook doesn't mean
other people using the GNU GPL won't, and there are many.
Er...
s/won't/will/
Hopefully my meaning was clear from context.
--
G. Branden
On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 01:30:36PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
I'll do this in the next day or so.
It took me a week to get to this, but I've done it (message attached).
I'll pass along whatever I learn.
--
G. Branden Robinson| When dogma enters the brain, all
Debian
possible that in the years since since some developer placed a rant
against the GNU GPL in his license, he's realized that the GNU GPL doesn't
actually have the power to change the copyright license on third-party
works.
--
G. Branden Robinson| That's the saving grace of humor
it myself.]
Jeff Licquia (a Debian Developer) has had some experience with this.
It might be worth asking his advice.
--
G. Branden Robinson|Fair use is irrelevant and
Debian GNU/Linux |improper.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Asst. U.S
that were, for many
years, open to all. These laws have greatly harmed plaintiffs’
artistic endeavors, and their ability to perform, teach, and
disseminate works to the public.
-- http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/golanvashcroft/golan-reply.html
--
G. Branden Robinson
On Sun, Jul 25, 2004 at 12:06:48PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
If I can discern the public domain version of the work from your
copyrighted version, then your version is not copyrighted at all.
Gar. Nasty typo.
s/can/cannot/
--
G. Branden Robinson| Mob rule isn't any
/
--
G. Branden Robinson|Quantum materiae materietur marmota
Debian GNU/Linux |monax si marmota monax materiam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |possit materiari?
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
really exists, I daresay the question is premature.
[4] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/1999/03/msg00072.html
--
G. Branden Robinson| Mob rule isn't any prettier just
Debian GNU/Linux | because you call your mob a
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 12:33:22PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Branden Robinson:
In the copyright holder's understanding, re-imposition of the
requirements of sections 2a and and 2c by those creating a derivative
work is not allowed, since those restrictions never attached
not *challenging*.)
This argument holds less water for binary document source formats.
--
G. Branden Robinson| I came, I saw, she conquered.
Debian GNU/Linux | The original Latin seems to have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | been garbled.
http
issues, but I don't want to robotically respond to
every single sentence you've written.
I don't want you to robotically repond either, and I reckon if you can't
work up the enthusiasm for anything more useful than that, I withdraw my
request.
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU
as many rights as they'd have if the
copyright were assigned to them.
--
G. Branden Robinson|I had thought very carefully about
Debian GNU/Linux |committing hara-kiri over this, but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |I overslept this morning.
http
/groups?hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=3FFC952B.2020302%40mozilla.org
--
G. Branden Robinson| It doesn't matter what you are
Debian GNU/Linux | doing, emacs is always overkill.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Stephen J. Carpenter
http://people.debian.org
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:19:33PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-12 02:46]:
IMO it would have helped if a Debian license arbitration body had been
formally delegated by the DPL, but as we all know, that didn't happen
[self-followup to add some information and make a correction]
On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 03:10:57PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
You did not use the words delegate or official, nor anything synonymous
as far as I can tell, in your reply to Mr. Quinlan.
Sorry, I meant to rewrite this paragraph
must not restrict
the usage of a work by all recipients. Does it need one[1]?
[1] People are awfully fond of skipping out of answering my questions with
the excuse that they're rhetorical, so I hereby put you all on notice
that this isn't one.
--
G. Branden Robinson|Of two
it:
If the license you accept is oppressive in its terms, that means you can
be oppressed.
[1] http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl.txt
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux | Ignorantia judicis est calamitas
[EMAIL PROTECTED
with the copyright regime when patents
are held to affect the same works as copyrights is an indictment of the
practice of both patenting and copyrighting software, not an indictment of
our license analysis practices.
These are my assertions. Yours appear to differ.
--
G. Branden Robinson
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:51:37AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 04:58:50PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
We shouldn't be worried about freedom from a philosophical masturbation
perspective.
I think there should
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:01:22PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where does the Social Contract bind us to using no tool other than the DFSG
to determine whether a work we distribute as part of our system is free?
Interestingly, the new version
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Branden Robinson:
Where does the Social Contract bind us to using no tool other than the DFSG
to determine whether a work we distribute as part of our system is free?
We are obligated to our users not to remove (maybe even
are, it appears, duty-bound to read the DFSG as narrowly as possible,
because it helps our users more to have publicly available software
distributed specifically by the Debian Project than bad licenses that take
away their freedoms harm them.
--
G. Branden Robinson|People are equally
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:01:05PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Mailing lists are like a debate. Not like a newspaper.
Well, *this* list is like a debate, as are discussion lists generally.
Announcement lists are more like newspapers.
--
G. Branden Robinson| What
the goals of
DFSG excellently.
Proof by assertion; wow. Good thing we're not lawyers, or we'd have
detected that fallacy.
--
G. Branden Robinson| The Rehnquist Court has never
Debian GNU/Linux | encountered a criminal statute it
[EMAIL PROTECTED
[4] http://www.fraserlawfirm.com/Publications/Business/BS-Venue.html
--
G. Branden Robinson| If God had intended for man to go
Debian GNU/Linux | about naked, we would have been
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | born that way.
http://people.debian.org
unir pbeerpgyl vasreerq gur fnepnfgvp angher bs guvf
cbfg. ;-) )
--
G. Branden Robinson| It's not a matter of alienating
Debian GNU/Linux | authors. They have every right to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | license their software however we
http
).
I think the grammar in this setence is defective; such that I cannot
determine whether you're making one statement or its opposite. Can you
clarify, please?
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=211765
[2] http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html
--
G. Branden Robinson
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 11:16:24AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-07-12 09:00:02 +0100 Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Data point: I can't scare up the reference at the moment, but The XFree
Project, Inc., asserted that the warranty disclaimer was a condition
of the MIT/X11 license
this software, you agree to ...).
It was motivated by reading a number of outrageous statements in licenses
over the years. The one I attributed to XFree86 was only the most recent.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Mob rule isn't any prettier just
Debian GNU/Linux
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 08:23:22AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
Branden Robinson writes:
If an innocent bystander is harmed through the operation of defective Free
Software, how can he or she be held to the warranty disclaimer, given that
he or she never received the corresponding
to base your assertion on fact and logic?
(5 days later...)
Perhaps not. :-/
--
G. Branden Robinson| I am only good at complaining.
Debian GNU/Linux | You don't want me near your code.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Dan Jacobson
http
it with real legal principle.
Passing the Desert Island test: It's not just a good idea, it's the Law.
--
G. Branden Robinson|When we call others dogmatic, what
Debian GNU/Linux |we really object to is their
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |holding dogmas
a U.S. citizen and resident, and consequently
everything I say must be suspected as an argument for occupying Iraq
and/or using the Kyoto Protocol as toilet paper. :-P
--
G. Branden Robinson| I am only good at complaining.
Debian GNU/Linux | You
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:41:00AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Branden Robinson:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 01:09:13PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 10:35:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 02:03:37PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
debian
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:23:00PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-14 02:55]:
I fail to see why debian-legal's undelegated status is at all relevant
given our current leadership philsophy.
The difference
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 07:18:36AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 01:49:55AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
I see; what sort of DFSG violations do you consider minor?
Minor is relative, and depends on context.
In the context of GPL compatability [which I think
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 05:17:25PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
At the same time, I'm struggling to determine an essential distinction
between a single de-facto closed-universe project, and a vast collection of
such projects (which all works licensed under the GNU GPL
wants to
forbid a derivative being numbered as xinetd 2.3.15, taking away the
official version number.
On what do you ground your statement of the author's intention?
--
G. Branden Robinson|No executive devotes much effort to
Debian GNU/Linux |proving
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 07:10:46PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 02:05:16AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
OTOH, as you're sure to note, an easy way around this is that a package can
be completely useless in main as long as what it depends on isn't a
package. Maybe
, this is not really a DFSG or debian-legal issue, it's a Debian
Policy issue.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Never attribute to malice that
Debian GNU/Linux | which can be adequately explained
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | by stupidity.
http://people.debian.org
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 02:08:06AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
I think every program in Debian is held to the standard of being useful.
Please, s/is held/should be held/.
If you're like me, you should fear the counterexamples that could be
brought to the fore.
--
G. Branden Robinson
when
we *dared* to find the IETF's RFC license non-free[1]. Somehow, not
shipping (some of) the RFCs in main made them inaccessible, and infeasible
to access.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=92810msg=5
...is just one of many examples
--
G. Branden Robinson
that this is not part of
the copyright license as well.
The DFSG problem is resolved as far as I can tell. Thanks a lot for
working with Best Practical, LLC to bring this issue to a positive
conclusion!
--
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 03:53:45PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 02:46:13AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
We do collectively understand that there are Free, full-featured graphical
browsers *other* than Netscape, right?
You're seriously suggesting that Debian wouldn't
varies
by the individual.
[2] http://www.debian.org/social_contract
(Surprisingly, it would seem, one can find the language Our Priorities
are Our Users and Free Software even in the original version of the
Social Contract.)
--
G. Branden Robinson| Psychology
between being screwed by people
within the Free Software community, and people outside it.
It is occasionally useful to be able to distinguish good neighbors from bad
ones.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Intellectual property is neither
Debian GNU/Linux
shall forfeit the argument.
--
G. Branden Robinson| If we believe absurdities, we
Debian GNU/Linux | shall commit atrocities.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Voltaire
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description
, without prior notice, and without your consent. is substantively
different.
Termination due to non-compliance is one thing.
Termination due to the copyright holder's, e.g., bad case of gas, is quite
another.
--
G. Branden Robinson|Kissing girls is a goodness. It is
Debian GNU
is not the one that is currently in force. Those who
were furious with the changes saw to that.
Oh, the irony. :)
[1] http://www.debian.org/social_contract
[2] http://www.debian.org/social_contract.1.0
--
G. Branden Robinson| The last time the Republican Party
Debian GNU/Linux
? What's the grand strategy behind this conspiracy?
If you can identify that, perhaps you'd be in a better position to combat
it, no?
--
G. Branden Robinson| Communism is just one step on the
Debian GNU/Linux | long road from capitalism to
[EMAIL PROTECTED
[I am not subscribed to debian-tetex-maint.]
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 02:38:20PM +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
On 11.07.04 Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hmmm. I don't suppose it's a *huge* deal, but do you think we
could ask upstream to apply the new LPPL to the existing
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 07:40:39PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
The license prohibits any redistribution at all, and instead of focussing
on that,
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 05:37:21PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
Why shouldn't we present license analyses that are as comprehensive as we
from exploring the ramfications of
clauses like the one in question, what we think of them, and where we
(Debian developers) disagree with each other as to what is and is not
DFSG-free.
--
G. Branden Robinson|Any man who does not realize that
Debian GNU/Linux
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 07:12:25PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 05:59:45PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
It doesn't seem to consider that possibility. Is it DFSG-free to prohibit
code reuse in other projects?
[...]
Patch clauses are at least one case in which
a
package. Maybe that *was* your point.
That would be a waste of archive resources.
Er, before heading down this road, I think you should attempt an objective
demonstration that we seem to give a damn about wasting archive resources
in the first place.
--
G. Branden Robinson
.
According to the bug logs, as of about a month ago Moritz Muehlenhoff
announced his intent to package it.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Why should I allow that same God
Debian GNU/Linux | to tell me how to raise my kids,
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 12:22:36AM +0900, Fedor Zuev wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Branden Robinson wrote:
Do we expect the typical user of the emulator to already have game
ROMs on hand? If so, by what means?
Do you really want to know and control the means, by which
debian users
.
[1] ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change
--
G. Branden Robinson| Religion is excellent stuff for
Debian GNU/Linux | keeping common people quiet.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Napoleon Bonaparte
http
example set by Craig
Sanders and other supporters of Proposal D?
--
G. Branden Robinson| One man's magic is another man's
Debian GNU/Linux | engineering. Supernatural is a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | null word.
http://people.debian.org/~branden
rather than
the official graphics. However, checking again, I see that this is not
the case in either the stable or unstable versions. This is definitely
a violation of the Abiword license, and should be submitted as a serious
bugreport on the abiword package.
Filed.
--
G. Branden Robinson
1 - 100 of 1376 matches
Mail list logo
