From: Justin Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject to your license, recipients may use the
work on one or more computers, and may create backup copies of it, but may
not otherwise copy, distribute, lend, sublicense, or adapt it.
Just reading this piece in isolation, I would think it fails the
Currently it's written like this:
You may create a derivative work based on our software by combining a
complete unmodified copy of our software, or a compiled version
it, with
your own separate source materials. You may license the work
directly to
third party end users. Subject
Rod, thanks again for your help.
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 07:05:32AM -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
Currently it's written like this:
You may create a derivative work based on our software by combining a
complete unmodified copy of our software, or a compiled version
it,
Hi David,
Thanks for your comments! You are one of the people whose comments I was
really hoping to get when posting this license to the list.
On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 06:15:08PM -0700, David Johnson wrote:
From the features listed (I haven't read the license yet):
Hands the community the
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000, Justin Wells wrote:
My reasoning is that with many opensource projects the original
author may vanish. Someone else takes over maintaing the project,
but may not have the authority to defend the license. Thus when
the original author vanishes, people may infringe without
Rod I really appreciate that you are taking some time to review this.
Thank you!
On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 06:42:57AM -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
Be careful. Free software is not exactly public domain, which is what I
think you have in mind. Only the copyright holder can go into court
For the sole purpose of taking action against an infringer of
our copyrights, including actions seeking remedies, compensation,
or the recovery of damages, anyone engaged in the lawful distribution
of our software shall be considered a beneficial owner of the
rights to copy and distribute
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
www.cyberspaces.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Justin Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 9:10 PM
To: Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Simple Public License, Please
On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 11:38:34PM -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
OK, I now understand what you are trying to do. I am concerned that these
holes you want to knock in your copyleft may turn out to be extraordinarily
large. A "consultant" or a "contractor" are terms with no legal
It's been a long time since I last posted a version of this license, and it
has changed a lot since then. I thought I would post it again and get some
comments from this list.
This license lives here:
http://shimari.com/SPL/
and will eventually be the primary license for Semiotek's
section
1. It is confusing.
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
www.cyberspaces.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Justin Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 4:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Simple Public License, Please Review
It's been a long time si
From the features listed (I haven't read the license yet):
Hands the community the power to take action against violators of
the license--even if the original author is not around, has lost
interest, or doesn't have the time or money.
Uh, why? I haven't read the license terms for this yet,
12 matches
Mail list logo
