On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 10:27:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hm, I could have sworn that the DFSG predated the Constitution and hence
predated the existence of the three-clause BSD license. UCB dropped the
advertising clause in July of 1999 and the DFSG
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe your reasoning is faulty, because it is based on incomplete
information. There was more than one BSD license in use well before
USB's Office of Technology Licensing withdrew the 4-clause version.
[snip]
While this is very interesting (I
[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
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[You didn't honor my M-F-T so I guess this will continue to go to both
lists.]
Indeed.
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 12:29:29PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
The version in /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD is very specifically the
UCB version,
A major
[Please follow up to -legal only. Full quote for the benefit of -legal.]
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 04:30:01PM +0100, Jean Parpaillon wrote:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:46:31PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 16:30 schrieb Jean Parpaillon:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:36:44 +0100 Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:46:31PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 16:30 schrieb Jean Parpaillon:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
brian m. carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Please follow up to -legal only.
Done.
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 04:30:01PM +0100, Jean Parpaillon wrote:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of
* mike skaggs:
I have a copyright question for you. To the extent my company wants
to use the Debian Linux O/S as an embedded O/S in a device, can you
please advise what copyright notice I should cite to? I understand
I must include the GPL language but after reading your policy
manual, I
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:47:34AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
Note that since you are creating an embedded system, the size of all
these files may be an issue. I believe you could legally supply them
separately as long as they are supplied in the same distribution
As long as we have stuff
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:47:34AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
Note that since you are creating an embedded system, the size of all
these files may be an issue. I believe you could legally supply them
separately as long as they are supplied in the same distribution
As
Josh Triplett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's true, but it seems pretty unlikely that an embedded system would
have any documentation installed.
Lots of embedded systems would like to be able to use the Debian
packages more or less whole -- and then remove things like
/usr/share/doc if they
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Josh Triplett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That seems a bit harsh; I think sarge would be quite usable for this
purpose, as long as you avoid GFDLed bits. Is there anything GFDLed in
Debian that isn't in /usr/share/{doc,info,man} ?
Gosh, nobody
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wites
Christopher Priest [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why should anyone but the source be required to keep or distribute
source
code when it is freely available from Debian. The web was not
available when
Debian may not be around forever. Many
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:00:03PM -0500, Christopher Priest wrote:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html I'd see any action going the
way of discussions first and then correction. If it actually went to court,
I'd expect a claim for statutory damages as there are no real damages.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a copyright question for you. To the extent my company wants
to use the Debian Linux O/S as an embedded O/S in a device, can you
please advise what copyright notice I should cite to? I understand I
must include the GPL language but after reading your policy
Wouldn't a typical install of Debian also properly install all the licenses
required? Do the Debian install scripts break the licenses of the component
software? Disk space is so cheap I can't see any developer spending time to
remove anything put in by an install.
Why would he have to do more
-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Copyright Question
Wouldn't a typical install of Debian also properly install all the licenses
required? Do the Debian install scripts break the licenses of the component
software? Disk space is so cheap I can't see any developer spending time to
remove anything
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:47:34AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
(Please note that I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. The
authoritative source for this information would be the actual licenses
for the packages you include.)
[snip]
Excellent text. Could someone put this on www.d.o
Christopher Priest [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why should anyone but the source be required to keep or distribute source
code when it is freely available from Debian. The web was not
available when
Debian may not be around forever. Many embedded devlopers don't
publicize which distribution
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Chris
Very pragmatic reasoning. I wondered the same thing. From a
practical standpoint, why would someone ask us for source code (ie,
order it, pay for replication costs, then wait for it to be shipped)
Not everybody who will get ahold of your product has a
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Unfortunately, it lacks permission to distribute modified copies
... and to alter it and distribute it freely?
While all logic and reason might
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Unfortunately, it lacks permission to distribute modified copies
... and to alter it and
Scripsit Jörgen Hägg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is this ok for Debian?
Yes.
--
Henning MakholmDe er da bare dumme. Det skal du bare sige til dem.
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Unfortunately, it lacks permission to distribute modified copies
... and to alter it and distribute it freely?
--
Henning Makholm Hele toget raslede imens Sjælland fór forbi.
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Unfortunately, it lacks permission to distribute modified copies
... and to alter it and distribute it freely?
While all logic and reason might say that is good enough, it at least
one notable
I raised an issue with the W3O regarding DTD licensing. I'm including
here my previous correspondance. I have another followup in my next
message from the W30 and my response.
--
.Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL:http://www.onShore.com/
---BeginMessage---
Hello. I have the responsibility of
[Note: I am CC'ing the debian-legal mailing list, which is concerned
with the process of evaulating licenses to determine whether we can
consider them free and include them in the distribution.]
jrj == Joseph M Reagle Jr (W3C) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jrj We are going to have to put more
28 matches
Mail list logo
