Dirk, Please don't apologize, you write far better in English than I do in any other language.
I agree with you that the situation is unclear, and the response I got did not help. I also regret that I cannot include NET in the final package. If they clarify the IP situation, or adopt a real license, I will of course reconsider then. As I said to them, I do not think there is any chance of widespread adoption of a timekeeping system if explicit permission is required for distribution OR commercial use. The response I received did not point out any mis-interpretation. Best, Tim West On Jun 6, 11:10 am, Dirk Zemisch <[email protected]> wrote: > Hallo rtimwest, > > rtimwest <[email protected]> schrieb am 04.06.2009 16:17 Uhr: > > > I contacted the folks at New Earth Time through their web page about > > the apparent conflict between the GPL(s), Creative Commons License, > > and their copyright notice that states that explicit permission must > > be obtained in order to "distribute" or use NET commercially. AFAIK, > > the Creative Commons License allows commercial use, and the GPL does, > > but with stipulations intended to ENSURE free distribution, not > > restrict it. > > English is not my native language (far from it), but I understand the > statement on the NET website as focussed on 'commercialization', not > distributing. But I'm fully agree with your arguments that this point > needs a clear explanation from degree NET Ltd. > > The used terminology ('The [...] concept is intellectual property of') > doesn't sound like an invitation to use the concept. > > > I received a short but polite response from Mark Laugesen, who has > > "New Earth Time, Canberra" in his e-mail sig. He expressed some > > interest in TiddlyWiki, and also expressed regret at the situation, > > but made no concrete offers or promises to change anything. > > In my humble opinion ist doesn't help - nor you for distributing the > plugin, neither the propagation of NET. > > > I'm not all all certain that they could make this stick- it seems to > > me unlikely that dividing the day into 360 units is the sort of thing > > that can be protected by copyright, although they can probably at > > least do that with the name. The CONCEPT would only be patentable (in > > theory) if there were no prior examples... but IANAL, and have no > > vested interest in contesting their claims or promoting their idea > > against their wishes. > > I'm fully agree and I'm sure, that there are a lot of regions on earth > where such concepts never will get a protection by law. > > > Accordingly, the prototype program NETTimePlugin has been removed from > > my accessible sites, even in it's pre-release form, even though it was > > not linked to, to prevent any possibility of "distribution". > > It's a pity! Again for both - te concept and your implemtation. But I > understand your irritations and support this decision. > > Regards! > Dirk > -- > > signature.asc > < 1KViewDownload --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
