Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
Corcomp Infosystems Ltd. is a India based IT services company providing business, technology as well as cost benefits enabled by Information technology. We provide business benefits by rendering enterprise solutions in verticles like retail, insurance, process manufacturing, transportation etc. In addition to business benefits to end users, we also provide IT development services to IT companies in US, UK and Germany. Outsourcing to India can be really a competitve edge for any IT company in US, UK or Germany. So this also provides cost benefits to IT companies as well as their end users. These solutions/services use either Microsoft technologies or Sun Java based technologies. We are a Microsoft Certified Solutions Provider as well a Sun Certified Developer Partner. Do you see any opportunity for us to work together ? Thanks and regards Miss Sampada Khole Business Development Manager (Outsourcing) Corcomp Infosystems Ltd. t: 091 022 509 3100 f: 091 022 514 0592 w: www.corcomp.com Offices in USA, UK, Germany -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: copyright protection under the Pan-American copyright treaty. (And it's still relevant, because there are some countries which have signed the Pan-American treaty, and not the Berne Convention.) No it's not really relevant because with the Berne Convention we couldn't even distribute it without the 'magic phrase'. You don't even have to claim copyright to have a work protected. Works without any copyright statement can't be distributed by Debian. Not even in non-free. -- Emacs er det eneste moderne styresystem der ikke er multitrådet.
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: copyright protection under the Pan-American copyright treaty. (And it's still relevant, because there are some countries which have signed the Pan-American treaty, and not the Berne Convention.) No it's not really relevant because with the Berne Convention we couldn't even distribute it without the 'magic phrase'. You don't even have to claim copyright to have a work protected. Works without any copyright statement can't be distributed by Debian. Not even in non-free. Yes, of course this is agreed. I was just explaining why all rights reserved is there, and that it doesn't mean anything like you have no license to copy; it's just an assertion of copyright under the Pan American convention, nothing more, nothing less. As I said in the very message you have trimmed, Debian's policy is not to cut such hairs, any claimed copyright we treat as if they claimed it properly. Is there some reason you trimmed that? Just so you could make the same point yourself? Thomas
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: Is there some reason you trimmed that? Just so you could make the same point yourself? No point being so agressive. I read the message as you meant that what I quoted had some relvance for the conclusion --- Which we aparently both knows is wrong. -- Emacs er det eneste moderne styresystem der ikke er multitrådet.
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: Is there some reason you trimmed that? Just so you could make the same point yourself? No point being so agressive. I read the message as you meant that what I quoted had some relvance for the conclusion --- Which we aparently both knows is wrong. Sorry for being too touchy. :) I'm up past my bedtime. When I said that all rights reserved is still relevant, I meant the following: The Berne Convention generally only requires Copyright and a date to claim a copyright, and sometimes, not even that. The older and different Pan American convention requires the additional phrase all rights reserved. But the latter phrase is still important in the world, because there are countries that are members of the Pan American convention but not the Berne convention, so publishers are well advised to put both, even now. But you thought I meant that it was still relevant for Debian; agreed that it's not--we honor even kludgy badly phrased copyrights, because that's safer, and safety is good. Thomas
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
(Just musing - the following does not change our conclusions about
whether Debian can distribute the files in question).
The Berne Convention generally only requires Copyright and a date to
claim a copyright, and sometimes, not even that.
In which cases does the Berne Convention require even Copyright and
a date? Article 15, paragraph 1 says:
| In order that the author of a literary or artistic work protected by
| this Convention shall, in the absence of proof to the contrary, be
| regarded as such, and consequently be entitled to institute
| infringement proceedings in the countries of the Union, it shall be
| sufficient for his name to appear on the work in the usual
| manner. This paragraph shall be applicable even if this name is a
| pseudonym, where the pseudonym adopted by the author leaves no doubt
| as to his identity.
I think in the usual manner would include things such as
\author{John Doe} without either date or the c-word.
--
Henning Makholm Jeg har tydeligt gjort opmærksom på, at man ved at
følge den vej kun bliver gennemsnitligt ca. 48 år gammel,
og at man sætter sin sociale situation ganske overstyr og, så
vidt jeg kan overskue, dør i dybeste ulykkelighed og elendighed.
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) (Just musing - the following does not change our conclusions about whether Debian can distribute the files in question). The Berne Convention generally only requires Copyright and a date to claim a copyright, and sometimes, not even that. In which cases does the Berne Convention require even Copyright and a date? Perhaps it doesn't. Perhaps it's some previous internation convention that required that. I know US law used to (and still it's a good idea to, if you want to get more damages).
Re: teTeX Documentation Licenses (B, C)
C.M. Connelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: B. Copyright (C) 1995 John Doe C. Copyright (C) 1988, all rights reserved. All rights reserved is the magic phrase that is necessary to get copyright protection under the Pan-American copyright treaty. (And it's still relevant, because there are some countries which have signed the Pan-American treaty, and not the Berne Convention.) Debian's policy is not to cut such hairs, any claimed copyright we treat as if they claimed it properly. These files we cannot distribute at all (either as part of Debian or in non-free).
