On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Lawrence Rosen lro...@rosenlaw.com wrote:
Rick Moen wrote:
You know, Clark: Speaking for myself, I have no interest in advising
querents about how closely they can lawfully skirt the requirements of
copyleft licences, or how they can creatively circumvent
Quoting Chris Travers (ch...@metatrontech.com):
Good for you (I mean that). As I say in the LedgerSMB project we hold
API's (however invoked) to be freely usable with the minor exception
that inheritance probably crosses the line into derivative works land
(because once inheritance is much
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 03:38:04AM -0800, Chris Travers wrote:
Thus in general I think one is generally better off talking with
upstream projects and trying to get them on board.
Take the most restrictive reasonable interpretation of both if you want
to play it safe. After all, a change in
Chad Perrin wrote:
Take the most restrictive reasonable interpretation of both if you want
to play it safe.
That's true as far as it goes but leaves out the fun part of the analysis.
The evaluation of risk -- particularly legal risk -- involves the analysis
of many factors. Sometimes the most
Lawrence Rosen scripsit:
And with regard to this irrational fear of the reach of the GPL
regarding functional linking that is but one minor factor in a complex
derivative work analysis, what is the risk that some court will force
me to disclose my *copyright-independent* crown jewel
5 matches
Mail list logo
