I'll try to get both a text and MS Word copy of the revised version
onto the web site today so that it will be available. Will send a
confirmation along with the link. Thanks,
Rob Padilla
At 12:48 AM -0500 3/13/04, Russell Nelson wrote:
Bryan Geurts writes:
Attached is a revised version of
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004, Russell McOrmond wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote:
(2) undertaking software development in a collaborative fashion so
that contributors are encouraged to find, document and fix defects;
Contributors to closed source software also collaborate and
Alexander's point is not exactly correct, but I think the main point was on
target; namely, in addressing questions concerning the copyrightability for
software, the object code is not likely to be treated differently than the
source code. In some cases, the distinction between object code and
5000 Euro Belohnung / 5000 Euro Reward
--
Ich biete eine Belohnung von 5000 Euro wenn mir jemand verraet
wie ein Streetgame (International Money Game) die Leute um den
Spieler herrum beeinflusst.
Ich stecke in genau diesem Unfug drin und
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
[...]
Having said that, Alexander's mistake appears to be ...
My mistake was the omission of reference (and context) to
the source of my comment.
http://www.digital-law-online.com/lpdi1.0/treatise26.html
(VI.B. Source Code and Object Code)
quote
Even though
I agree with John, but, if there is a connection, it is not readily
apparent. Would you explain your point further?
There may be a conceptually interesting question regarding whether a
particular public license is a restriction on liberty or a grant of
permission to do a thing that otherwise
The FSF analogy of public license and the GPL is really what I was
referring to. The analogy of
the GPL as a General Public License is extremely confusing to a large
number of people.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
The essence of copyright law, like other systems of property
daniel wallace scripsit:
The FSF analogy of public license and the GPL is really what I was
referring to.
I believe that the term public license in the GPL and other licenses
refers to the fact that everyone -- every member of the public -- is a
licensee.
The first paragraph quoted from
Quoting daniel wallace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
This confusion gives rise to the myth that a copyright license is not
a contract. Even a bare license is a unilateral contract and any
dispute in a court of law will be examined first under state common
law of contract prior to evaluating federal
9 matches
Mail list logo
