Re: Warranty disclaimers with SHOUTY CAPITALS (was: licensing of XMPP specifications)

2008-01-09 Thread Arnoud Engelfriet
John Halton wrote: > "USA: NOTE: In all States in the USA (except Louisiana) all > disclaimers of warranty of merchantability or warranty of fitness for > any particular purpose must be conspicuous and are usually in boldface > or uppercase (capital) print or both." This is based on the US case of

Re: Translated man pages licenses

2008-01-09 Thread John Halton
On Jan 9, 2008 4:01 AM, Michal Čihař <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "commercial distribution may impose other > requirements (e.g., acknowledgement of copyright or inclusion of the > raw nroff sources with the commercial distribution)" Sounds to me like that may just be a reference to the requiremen

Re: Warranty disclaimers with SHOUTY CAPITALS (was: licensing of XMPP specifications)

2008-01-09 Thread John Halton
On Jan 9, 2008 12:20 AM, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] because no lawyer on Earth knows [why] they aren't in mixed > case and everybody seems to think that everybody else knows and > that he's the only one that doesn't know and he was absent that > day in law school.

Re: Warranty disclaimers with SHOUTY CAPITALS

2008-01-09 Thread Ben Finney
"John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have a (slightly old) edition of Rennie's "Computer and Internet > Contracts and Law" (a leading English software precedents > looseleaf), and the notes state as follows in a number of contracts: > > "USA: NOTE: In all States in the USA (except Louisi

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread MJ Ray
Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [...] Unless separate permission is granted, > modified works that are redistributed shall not contain misleading > information regarding the authors, title, number, or publisher of the > Specification, and shall not claim endorsement of the modified works

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Tristan Seligmann
* MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-09 11:44:19 +]: > The copyright when XSF license it is covering a specification and if a > modified work is something else, that doesn't change the nature of > what your copyright was, as far as I can tell. I think something went wrong with your sentence

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread John Halton
On Jan 9, 2008 3:32 PM, Tristan Seligmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The copyright when XSF license it is covering a specification and if a > > modified work is something else, that doesn't change the nature of > > what your copyright was, as far as I can tell. > > I think something went wrong

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
MJ Ray wrote: Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] Unless separate permission is granted, modified works that are redistributed shall not contain misleading information regarding the authors, title, number, or publisher of the Specification, and shall not claim endorsement of the modifi

Questionable copyright on image file in stormbaancoureur packages

2008-01-09 Thread Barry deFreese
Hi, In trying to upgrade to the latest upstream for stormbaancoureur for the Debian Games Team, Paul Wise caught the following in the package. From /stormbaancoureur-2.0.1/images-stormbaancoureur/README "engine.tga Rendered from purchased 3D model" I contacted the author and received the fol

Re: Questionable copyright on image file in stormbaancoureur packages

2008-01-09 Thread Miriam Ruiz
2008/1/9, Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > In trying to upgrade to the latest upstream for stormbaancoureur for the > Debian Games Team, Paul Wise caught the following in the package. > > From /stormbaancoureur-2.0.1/images-stormbaancoureur/README > > "engine.tga > Rendered from purch

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:29:54 -0700 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > MJ Ray wrote: [...] > > About Specification - I'm not bothered about that wording. I don't think > > the arguments against using MIT/Expat hold water and I'm very unhappy > > about XSF making a new licence, but at least work under this

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Ben Finney
Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Perhaps bold text will help. I'll play around with the formatting > somewhat. The license will appear only in HTML files, not ASCII as > I've pasted here, so we have some leeway about formatting. Not true. The license will appear in modified works a

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Francesco Poli wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:29:54 -0700 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: MJ Ray wrote: [...] About Specification - I'm not bothered about that wording. I don't think the arguments against using MIT/Expat hold water and I'm very unhappy about XSF making a new licence, but at least wo

Re: Questionable copyright on image file in stormbaancoureur packages

2008-01-09 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:09:58 -0500 Barry deFreese wrote: > Hi, Hi! [...] > "engine.tga > Rendered from purchased 3D model" [...] > >No, the image is copyrighted by me. > >I purchased the right to make renderings from a 3D model. > > > >This 3D model is not included in the game. > > Is this

Re: Questionable copyright on image file in stormbaancoureur packages

2008-01-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 03:09:58PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote: > In trying to upgrade to the latest upstream for stormbaancoureur for the > Debian Games Team, Paul Wise caught the following in the package. > From /stormbaancoureur-2.0.1/images-stormbaancoureur/README > "engine.tga > Rendered f

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Ben Finney wrote: Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Perhaps bold text will help. I'll play around with the formatting somewhat. The license will appear only in HTML files, not ASCII as I've pasted here, so we have some leeway about formatting. Not true. The license will appear in

Re: Questionable copyright on image file in stormbaancoureur packages

2008-01-09 Thread Miriam Ruiz
2008/1/9, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > His statement that he holds the copyright most likely protects us from > charges of willful infringement under US law. That's about as much > protection as you get from any upstream; it's still copyright infringement > if an upstream is wrong about t

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Ben Finney
Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry, but I have concluded that the solution is SHOUTY CAPITALS. It > works for others, it will work for us. I have more pressing matters > to attend to and can't spend more time on how exactly to make this > text conspicuous. Okay. I'm arguing for

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Ben Finney wrote: Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Sorry, but I have concluded that the solution is SHOUTY CAPITALS. It works for others, it will work for us. I have more pressing matters to attend to and can't spend more time on how exactly to make this text conspicuous. Okay. I

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Ben Finney
Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How about this (to be formatted in bold in the HTML, though we'd > lose that in ASCII) Less shouty, so that's a good thing. Whether it passes the test of "conspicuous" as required under U.S. UCC, I don't know. > The capitalization follows that

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

2008-01-09 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Ben Finney wrote: Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: How about this (to be formatted in bold in the HTML, though we'd lose that in ASCII) Less shouty, so that's a good thing. Whether it passes the test of "conspicuous" as required under U.S. UCC, I don't know. The capitalizat