On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
A lot of you write and distribute free perl code. What do you do about
copyright and disclaimers in the code itself. I've had a look at a few
examples and it seems you don't really bother.
I think it is probably worth doing, and we will need one for
Aaron Trevena sent the following bits through the ether:
I habitually use the GPL, I have only recently realised how much of a pig
it can be to keep a derived work compliant.
Yup, that's why I like it so much. *This week* I'm a fan of the GPL,
and how it keeps the community going. [insert
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 09:59:20AM +0100, Aaron Trevena wrote:
I habitually use the GPL, I have only recently realised how much of a pig
it can be to keep a derived work compliant. It will now take as long to
audit the changes made to mny derived work of mwforum as it did to do some
of the
From: "David Cantrell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10 April 2001 10:40
Subject: Re: Disclaimer
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 09:58:41AM +0100, dcross - David Cross wrote:
Anything I release always has the following copyright and I think that a
number of module
From: Robert Shiels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 11:28 AM
From: "David Cantrell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 09:58:41AM +0100, dcross - David Cross wrote:
Anything I release always has the following copyright and I think that
a
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, dcross - David Cross wrote:
[broken quoting snipped]
You want the GPL for that. Which means that you can't use my copyright
message as it includes the Artisitc License - which doesn't disallow your
point 2.
The GPL doesn't stop you selling the derived work. What it *does*
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, dcross - David Cross wrote:
[broken quoting snipped]
You want the GPL for that. Which means that you can't use my copyright
message as it includes the Artisitc License - which doesn't disallow your
point 2.
The GPL
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Aaron Trevena wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, dcross - David Cross wrote:
[broken quoting snipped]
You want the GPL for that. Which means that you can't use my copyright
message as it includes the Artisitc License -
From: "dcross - David Cross" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You want the GPL for that. Which means that you can't use my copyright
message as it includes the Artisitc License - which doesn't disallow your
point 2.
I think therefore GPL will be good. People can sell my code, but as I will
be giving it
On Mon Apr 9 13:09:31 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
A lot of you write and distribute free perl code. What do you do about
copyright and disclaimers in the code itself. I've had a look at a few
examples and it seems you don't really bother.
I think it is probably worth doing, and we will need
On Tue Apr 10 11:27:48 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
1. I want anything I write to be free for others to use and generally bugger
about with.
2. I don't want anyone to be allowed to sell my code, or to sell anything
closely derived from it.
Then you cannot use GPL, Artistic, BSD, or any free
On Tue Apr 10 13:59:15 2001, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
No. You cannot sell the source and binaries seperately.
Yes you can. If you do, you must sell the source at cost price.
--
Marty
PGP signature
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Aaron Trevena wrote:
The simplist would be
# Name - brief description. (c) Copyright 2001 A Nother #
# This is free software available under the same license as perl itself
# This sofwate comes with NO WARRANTY. For more information see URL or
FILE.
The NO WARRANTY
13 matches
Mail list logo
