Hello All,
I have a question I'm unable to confirm the answer to and was hoping someone on
this list could kindly lend me their expertise in answering it. I'm a freeware
software coder and publish simple tools for anyone to download. Recently I've
been working on a larger project and because
Could you please remove the address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
from the license listserve.
Thanks
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own
surrounding the license would indicate to me that you are 'expressing'
yourself.
Respectfully,
Ryan Ismert
-Original Message-
From: Lawrence E. Rosen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:37 PM
To: 'Rod Dixon'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Academic Free
I have a question about mysql's licensing terms. They provide an
option to license either under their proprietary license, or the GPL.
According to their website (and from what I have heard from others),
mysql says that if you are only going to use their software inhouse
and not distribute it to
identical? If they are not identical, how might
one test the object of the condition?
Anyone care to hold forth?
Ryan Ismert
Software Developer
Sportvision, Inc.
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
is making money off
my work unless I do too?
Ryan S. Dancey
Learn about Open Gaming: www.opengamingfoundation.org
hwart/foil the hackers;
most of whom are able to use the same debugging/profiling tools the
developers have and can get at the internals of object-code only releases
anyway.
Openness is good for gaming just like it is good for cyrptography.
Ryan
n external patent applied,
necessitating a rewrite of the affected portions of the software; and
possibly "breaking" dependencies.
The GPL is a copyright license, so it isn't going to be much help in
defending against a hostile patent suit.
Ryan
e copyleft concept is supposed to ensure that any material I use or modify
which is based on copylefted content has to obey the same terms as the
original copyleft license, correct?
The concept of "copyleft" itself shouldn't be so specific as to include
material related to the linking model of computer software, should it?
Ryan
lation,
thus I don't think the GPL governs the situation.
Ryan
to page 100 of Novel A again.
Are Novel A and B now a derivative work?
Ryan
the free code that is actually combined with the non-free
code are the function prototypes, which I maintain cannot be copyrighted,
and thus are not governed by the terms of either the LGPL or the GPL.
Ryan
- and to my mind, that's a
positive step forward.
Ryan
ave to do
is provide a copy of the license. You don't necessarily have to follow the
license.)
The license does not require that the source code be distributed with
binaries. (That means it doesn't comply with OSD #2.)
Ryan
OSD #2:
"The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source
code as well as compiled form. "
And if "due credit" means "money", it violates #1 as well.
Ryan
potential OSD #1 conflict.
Part of the point of submitting licenses to this list is to get feedback
about them and help to improve them based on the shared community experience
in dealing with the concept of Open Source and Free Software. I'm frankly
surprised at the seemingly hostile tone of the responses I received to my
feedback.
Ryan
en?
Is Microsoft Windows open source? If you're one of Microsoft's 1,000
biggest customers, they'll give you the source code to Windows. Sure, 60
million people don't have the source, but some people do, and that seems
sufficient to comply with this interpretation of OSD #2.
Ryan
ly linked to discussions of
ethics.
I must therefore disagree with your interpretation of the content of the
OSD. It is as much an ethical framework as the Declaration of Independence
is. And like the Declaration which heavily influenced the contents of the
Constitution which resulted from it, the OSD has to acknowledge that the
ethical framework it espouses will be encapsulated in the licenses it
inspires.
Ryan
ersion to other people, then you are
the problem, not the original license terms.
Ryan
is readily available.
Thus, the license MUST have a term which describes this guarantee.
Because if the license does not have such a term, then the license does not
guarantee anything.
Ryan
meaningless. OSI Certification
should mean "the rights granted to you WILL comply with the OSD." Not "MAY"
comply with the OSD.
Ryan
21 matches
Mail list logo
