In compliance with [1] I'm requesting that you please update the W3C license
maintained [2] on your site as that license (copyright-software-19980720)
is now deprecated. The new version [3] was created so as to ensure
continuing compatability with the OSI definition and GPL. Please indicate
if
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Andy Tai wrote:
You sell proprietary, or non-Free, software. How dare
you say you are doing the right thing? :-( :-)
rant
I am sorry the kids are hungary, and robbing banks is to much work.
After 5 years of giving away IP for free, I guess people expect to remain
hersey
On 6 Jan 2003, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of the questions about Derivative Work as it relates to binary
only loadable objects, is the creation of a boundary layer of execution.
Specifically, the design and publishing an API which properly glues into
an open
I continue to believe that these confusing messages about derivative
works entirely miss the mark. Where in the statutory or case law can
one find support for such conclusions as are reflected in these
messages?
If you don't create a work based upon one or more preexisting works
then you have
On 6 Jan 2003, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Andre Hedrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of the questions about Derivative Work as it relates to binary
only loadable objects, is the creation of a boundary layer of execution.
Specifically, the design and publishing an API which properly
Lawrence E. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you don't create a work based upon one or more preexisting works
then you have simply not created a derivative work. 17 U.S.C. ยง101.
How in the world does an independently-written piece of software that
communicates with another
On Monday 06 January 2003 06:24 pm, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
When writing a binary loadable module in Linux, can you really be
described as using a published API? I'm not aware of any meaningful
publishing of that API other than the Linux sources themselves, and
it's worth noting that API
Andre Hedrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I ship and sell binary only products, so I have an interest in not
restricting people.
Other than your customers, presumably. Restrictions cut both ways.
In what way would a restrict cut both ways here?
Binary only products
So what if most of the Linux kernel is loadable modules? Probably
Linux is not a derivative work of those loadable modules, but instead a
compilation or collective work. The GPL doesn't require you to publish
the source code of either of those types of work.
But there are other reasons to
On Monday 06 January 2003 08:57 pm, Lawrence E. Rosen wrote:
...in order to gain an understanding of the unprotected
functional elements of the program...
By stating unprotected functional elements, the court has ruled that such
beasties actually exist! It implies that functionality is
Lawrence E. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what if most of the Linux kernel is loadable modules? Probably
Linux is not a derivative work of those loadable modules, but instead a
compilation or collective work. The GPL doesn't require you to publish
the source code of either of those
11 matches
Mail list logo
