Re: reminder: joint tech-legal call at top of hour (10am Pacific time)

Unsubscribe. Thank you. On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:41 AM J Lovejoy wrote: > We will continue the discussion on + / only for licenses > > Please see: > https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/or-later-vs-unclear-disambiguation > > To accomodate a potentially larger group,

Re: License checking tool available

Errata: W3C and WHATWG operate in *a somewhat similar manner* On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 3:51 AM Josh Habdas <jhab...@gmail.com> wrote: > Given there are bodies such as OSI and SPDX present, with presence on the > GitHub community, would the need for such a tool be mitigated if some

Re: License checking tool available

Given there are bodies such as OSI and SPDX present, with presence on the GitHub community, would the need for such a tool be mitigated if something like the GPL—itself being copy written and arguably difficult to use —be mitigated if each license

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

Thank you for your help, Sam et al., and for taking the time to respond. The information and insight you have provided is very valuable to me and I'm sure will prove useful in shaping the way crypto licenses are approached. I will take more time to digest this and hope you were able to enjoy the

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

d a simple, low-txn-cost replacement for begware that > sometimes accompanies licenses (really, almost frictionless). I wish you > luck! > > Best, > Brad Edmondson > > -- > Brad Edmondson, *Esq.* > 512-673-8782 <(512)%20673-8782> | brad.edmond...@gmail.com > >

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

Thank you for this valuable information, Philippe. I will pursue your advice. Thank you all for your time. On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:42 PM Philippe Ombredanne <pombreda...@nexb.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Josh Habdas <jhab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Fo

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

chieve that goal! ;) > > Finally and on a slightly separate note - your assertion that there are > some "20 odd licenses now awaiting review” by the SPDX Legal team is > incorrect. > > > Thanks, > Jilayne > > SPDX Legal Team co-lead > opensou...@jilayne.com >

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

Haven't heard back and joined the list. Sorry for the noise but is this request being tracked for discussion? On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:04 AM Josh Habdas <jhab...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can change something insignificant if it helps, but this seemed better > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

I can change something insignificant if it helps, but this seemed better On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:03 AM Josh Habdas <jhab...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's the exact same, in fact. Save for the copyright line. And here's why > this new license is important: > > > https://medium.com

Re: New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

ts reserved." or > "(c) 2012 John Doe." Templates may or may not include markup for this > guideline.") > > > -- > > From: "Josh Habdas" <jhab...@gmail.com> > To: spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org > Sent: Wed

New License/Exception Request: BTC License (BTC)

gt;. Example license header <https://github.com/jhabdas/fetch-inject/blob/master/src/injectors.js>. Example abbreviated license header <http://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/fetch-inject@1.9.1/dist/fetch-inject.min.js>. Thank you for your consideration. Regards, Josh Habdas LICENSE