Lawrence Rosen wrote at 17:00 (EDT) on Tuesday:
I asked for practical examples. You cited none. In the world of
copyrights or most logical pursuits, absence of evidence isn't
evidence.
License compatibility issues come up regularly on lots of bug tickets
and threads about licensing on lots of
A colleague of mine asked for my comment on the following license:
https://beansbooks.com/home/opensource (included in full text below for
the archives). It's reminiscent of the Yahoo! Public License and Zimbra
Public License.
I notice that it seems that the Zimbra Public License and Yahoo! are
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Bradley M. Kuhn bk...@ebb.org wrote:
I don't think we need to (or should have) this debate (again) here
Yes, please, let's not rehash this discussion here. It's been done
many times, and the list is already overflowing this week.
Luis
Hi Luis,
I refuse your request to be silent. What is more important to this list than
this discussion? I won't just sit here like a lump while Bradley and others
continue to encourage OSI to accept erroneous theories about license
proliferation and while various groups implement FOSS license
Till Jaeger answer to the question What is a derivative work? is (on slide
4): I dont know (and probably nobody else) !
I do agree with him as long there is no case law, but my personal feeling
(which as no value as case law !) is that the Court of Justice of the
European Union would *not* follow
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:59:43AM -0400, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
The GPL has always tried to go as far as copyright would allow to
mandate software freedom. That's what Michael Meeks (and/or Jeremy
Allison -- I heard them both use this phrase within a few weeks of each
other and not sure who
Bradley Kuhn wrote:
Finally, I'm unlikely to respond to this thread further as I think the
use of slurs like infect (notwithstanding the quotes, and '?') to refer
to copyleft are just unnecessarily inflammatory. I've asked you not to
talk about copyleft using slur words so many times before
I also believe that incompatibility is a myth.
Here's excellent paper:
http://www.btlj.org/data/articles/21_04_04.pdf
DANGEROUS LIAISONS—SOFTWARE
COMBINATIONS AS DERIVATIVE WORKS?
DISTRIBUTION,INSTALLATION, AND EXECUTION
OF LINKED PROGRAMS UNDER COPYRIGHT LAW,
COMMERCIAL LICENSES, AND THE GPL
For what it is worth, I am a lawyer that does work in the open source world and
I have found the recent discussions, including the Rosen/Kuhn dialog, to be
among the interesting and valuable discussions that I've seen on this list in a
while.
And yes, I have been doing open source work long
Quoting Luis Villa (l...@lu.is):
Yes, please, let's not rehash this discussion here. It's been done
many times, and the list is already overflowing this week.
I'd actually be interested in Bradley or Eben pointing to any caselaw
that supports their view. It's a fair, interesting, and relevant
Larry, it seems that you responded to my point that calling the GPL by the
name 'infection' is a slur that spreads needless discord with (paraphrased)
it's not the GPL; it's the work that *you*, Bradley, and others have done
enforcing the GPL that's an infection on our community.
This doesn't
11 matches
Mail list logo
