Chris Gray wrote:
You'll also see that Going To The Media (tm) was proposed and
rejected as a first approach: softly softly did it.
I'll give them a call this morning, cordially mention some of the points
made, and see what the reaction is.
-t
--
license-discuss archive is at
From: Matthew C. Weigel
The Open Source Initiative owns the servicemark OSI Approved Open
Source Software, and that is all.
Not quite! The certification mark is OSI Certified and the goods are
open source software. Thus the usage is:
OSI Certified Open Source Software
/Larry Rosen
On Friday 30 November 2001 03:31 pm, Tina Gasperson wrote:
ACARA (http://www.openchannelsoftware.com/projects/ACARA) is a program
originally developed by NASA. ACARA is now being handled by the Open
Channel Foundation (http://www.openchannelsoftware.com). ACARA's license
terms
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Tina Gasperson wrote:
Does a license have to comply with the published requirements
(http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html) in order for the distributor
or creator of the software to call it open source?
No. It is encouraged socially to 'help the end user' by
The question presented is actually a very good one in my opinion because
it calls out a subtle complexity with discussing open source and
understanding what is really meant by the various uses (and, possibly,
misuses) of the term. I think a programmer may freely identify their
software as closed
On Tuesday 30 October 2001 08:52 pm, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
the term or phrase open source is generic, and often used as
a marketing phrase in much the same manner as diet soda is used. I
cannot imagine what the legal basis would be to bring a fraud claim on
the use the term open
On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, David Johnson wrote:
On Friday 30 November 2001 03:31 pm, Tina Gasperson wrote:
ACARA (http://www.openchannelsoftware.com/projects/ACARA) is a program
originally developed by NASA. ACARA is now being handled by the Open
Channel Foundation
7 matches
Mail list logo
