debian-legal  

Messages by Date

• 2026/04/19 Re: Icons for proprietary software in contrib package Ilya Orlov
• 2026/04/17 Re: Icons for proprietary software in contrib package Soren Stoutner
• 2026/04/17 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Soren Stoutner
• 2026/04/17 Re: Icons for proprietary software in contrib package Ilya Orlov
• 2026/04/16 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Nicholas D Steeves
• 2026/04/16 Re: Icons for proprietary software in contrib package Xavier
• 2026/04/16 Icons for proprietary software in contrib package Ilya Orlov
• 2026/04/14 Re: Non-DFSG license in build files Santiago Vila
• 2026/04/14 Non-DFSG license in build files Moshe Piekarski
• 2026/04/06 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Vincent F. Heuser Jr.
• 2026/04/06 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Marcia Wilbur
• 2026/04/06 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Toni Mueller
• 2026/03/25 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Bastian Blank
• 2026/03/25 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Pierre-Elliott Bécue
• 2026/03/25 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Pierre-Elliott Bécue
• 2026/03/24 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Otto Kekäläinen
• 2026/03/24 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/18 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Simon McVittie
• 2026/03/18 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Sam Hartman
• 2026/03/18 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Rafael Laboissière
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Lee
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/17 Fwd: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Jamie Null
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/17 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Soren Stoutner
• 2026/03/17 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Michael Stehmann
• 2026/03/17 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Gunnar Wolf
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Marco Trevisan
• 2026/03/17 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Marco Trevisan
• 2026/03/17 Re: License conditions for a specific file in praat Michael Stehmann
• 2026/03/17 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Michael Stehmann
• 2026/03/17 License conditions for a specific file in praat Rafael Laboissière
• 2026/03/17 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Simon McVittie
• 2026/03/16 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Mechtilde Stehmann
• 2026/03/16 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/16 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/16 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Soren Stoutner
• 2026/03/16 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Luke Faraone
• 2026/03/16 Re: ansible-runner: guidance requested on possible Apache-2.0/GPL-3.0 incompatibility Sakirnth Nagarasa
• 2026/03/16 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Mechtilde Stehmann
• 2026/03/16 Re: GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Soren Stoutner
• 2026/03/15 GPL-3+ licensed test fixture (SVG/metadata) in BSD-3 project Carl Keinath
• 2026/03/14 Re: ansible-runner: guidance requested on possible Apache-2.0/GPL-3.0 incompatibility Soren Stoutner
• 2026/03/14 ansible-runner: guidance requested on possible Apache-2.0/GPL-3.0 incompatibility Sakirnth Nagarasa
• 2026/03/14 ansible-runner: guidance requested on possible Apache-2.0/GPL-3.0 incompatibility Sakirnth Nagarasa
• 2026/03/13 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Gunnar Wolf
• 2026/03/12 Re: Age Verification Joerg Jaspert
• 2026/03/11 Re: Age Verification Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/11 Re: Age Verification Jamie Null
• 2026/03/11 Re: Age Verification Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/11 Re: Age Verification Vincent F. Heuser Jr.
• 2026/03/11 Age Verification Shaugn Nell
• 2026/03/11 Re: Age Verification Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/10 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/10 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Jamie Null
• 2026/03/10 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/10 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Jeremy Soller
• 2026/03/09 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Artur Manuel
• 2026/03/09 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Lucas Holt
• 2026/03/09 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/09 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Jeremy Soller
• 2026/03/05 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Soren Stoutner
• 2026/03/04 Re: Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Vincent F. Heuser Jr.
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Adenix NPSP
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states Personal (disroot.org)
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Jean-Baptiste Lallement
• 2026/03/04 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Moritz Schlarb
• 2026/03/03 On the need for a censorship API for legal compliance reasons in some countries and U.S. states FloofyWolf
• 2026/03/03 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/03 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/03 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Heinrich Schuchardt
• 2026/03/03 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aigars Mahinovs
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Stephan Verbücheln
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Jamie Null
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Christopher Warner
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Vincent F. Heuser Jr.
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states David Edmundson
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Danielle Foré
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Vincent F. Heuser Jr.
• 2026/03/01 Re: On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/03/01 On the unfortunate need for an "age verification" API for legal compliance reasons in some U.S. states Aaron Rainbolt
• 2026/02/28 Re: Distribution of CDDL binaries in contrib Bastian Blank
• 2026/02/28 Distribution of CDDL binaries in contrib Jarl Gullberg
• 2026/02/27 Re: Updating the PHP license Francesco Poli
• 2026/02/26 Re: Updating the PHP license Ben Ramsey
• 2026/02/15 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Simon Josefsson
• 2026/02/14 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Don Armstrong
• 2026/02/14 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Simon Josefsson
• 2026/02/14 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Don Armstrong
• 2026/02/14 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Changwoo Ryu
• 2026/02/13 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Gioele Barabucci
• 2026/02/13 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Soren Stoutner
• 2026/02/13 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Gioele Barabucci
• 2026/02/10 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Simon Josefsson
• 2026/02/10 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Andrius Merkys
• 2026/02/10 Re: Software implementing patented techniques Simon McVittie
• 2026/02/10 Software implementing patented techniques Andrius Merkys
• 2026/01/30 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Dave Crossland
• 2026/01/29 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Soren Stoutner
• 2026/01/29 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Daniel Hakimi
• 2026/01/29 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Sune Vuorela
• 2026/01/28 Re: SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Charles Plessy
• 2026/01/28 SIL OFL 1.1 plus "reserved font name" is DFSG? Nicholas D Steeves
• 2026/01/12 Re: BSD-4-clause with different development organizations Simon Josefsson
• 2026/01/10 Re: BSD-4-clause with different development organizations Soren Stoutner
• 2026/01/10 BSD-4-clause with different development organizations Peter Wienemann
• 2025/12/31 RE Kristalina Georgieva
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Soren Stoutner
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Fabio Fantoni
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Soren Stoutner
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Fabio Fantoni
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Francesco Poli
• 2025/12/23 Re: Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Soren Stoutner
• 2025/12/23 Question about icons related to a trademark in a package Fabio Fantoni
• 2025/12/09 Re: no licenses are granted + BSD-3-clause Jérémy Lal
• 2025/12/09 Re: no licenses are granted + BSD-3-clause Daniel Hakimi
• 2025/12/09 Re: no licenses are granted + BSD-3-clause Soren Stoutner
• 2025/12/09 no licenses are granted + BSD-3-clause Jérémy Lal
• 2025/12/06 Logo copyright infringement Cato Nilsen
• 2025/12/01 Re: SF logo + CC0 license (upcoming octave-gnerate-html package) Rafael Laboissière
• 2025/11/30 Re: SF logo + CC0 license (upcoming octave-gnerate-html package) John Scott
• 2025/11/30 SF logo + CC0 license (upcoming octave-gnerate-html package) Rafael Laboissière
• 2025/11/25 Re: How to handle copyright notices in testdata intended for license validation tools? Soren Stoutner
• 2025/11/24 Re: How to handle copyright notices in testdata intended for license validation tools? Simon Josefsson
• 2025/11/23 Re: How to handle copyright notices in testdata intended for license validation tools? Richard Laager
• 2025/11/23 How to handle copyright notices in testdata intended for license validation tools? Simon Josefsson
• 2025/11/14 Re: Fw: Re: VVVVVV - Seeking Sponsorship computermouth
• 2025/11/13 Re: Fw: Re: VVVVVV - Seeking Sponsorship Walter Landry
• 2025/11/11 Re: Fw: Re: VVVVVV - Seeking Sponsorship Mihai Moldovan
• 2025/11/11 Fw: Re: VVVVVV - Seeking Sponsorship computermouth
• 2025/10/18 Re: HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE Joerg Jaspert
• 2025/10/18 Re: Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement Soren Stoutner
• 2025/10/18 Re: HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE Henrik Ahlgren
• 2025/10/17 Re: Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement Francesco Poli
• 2025/10/17 Re: HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE Simon Josefsson
• 2025/10/17 Re: Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement John Scott
• 2025/10/13 Re: HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE Andrew M.A. Cater
• 2025/10/08 Re: Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement Soren Stoutner
• 2025/10/08 Re: Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement Soren Stoutner
• 2025/10/08 Re: HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE David Given
• 2025/10/08 HIPPOCRATIC LICENSE Simon Josefsson
• 2025/10/08 Seeking advice on DFSG compatibility of MIT license plus custom attribution requirement Boyuan Yang
• 2025/09/21 Re: GPLv2 compliance for third-party Docker images. Charles Plessy
• 2025/09/21 Re: GPLv2 compliance for third-party Docker images. Francesco Poli
• 2025/09/20 GPLv2 compliance for third-party Docker images. Charles Plessy
• 2025/09/18 Re: Re: conquer relicensing Juan Mendez
• 2025/09/16 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Michael Lustfield
• 2025/09/09 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Soren Stoutner
• 2025/09/09 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Andrea Pappacoda
• 2025/09/08 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Henrik Ahlgren
• 2025/09/03 Re: BSD-2-Clause with 'in this position and unchanged' addition? libarchive Soren Stoutner
• 2025/09/03 Re: BSD-2-Clause with 'in this position and unchanged' addition? libarchive Daniel Hakimi
• 2025/09/03 Re: BSD-2-Clause with 'in this position and unchanged' addition? libarchive Soren Stoutner
• 2025/09/03 BSD-2-Clause with 'in this position and unchanged' addition? libarchive Simon Josefsson
• 2025/09/01 Re: Copyright of console illustrations John Scott
• 2025/09/01 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Michael Lustfield
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Simon Josefsson
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Andrew M.A. Cater
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations David Given
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Francesco Poli
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Simon Josefsson
• 2025/08/31 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Tobias Frost
• 2025/08/30 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Michael Lustfield
• 2025/08/30 Re: Copyright of console illustrations Soren Stoutner
• 2025/08/30 Copyright of console illustrations Andrea Pappacoda
• 2025/08/22 Re: Re: is it allowed to deny access to obsolete GPL2 source packages? Pete P
• 2025/08/22 Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Aryan Karamtoth
• 2025/08/19 Ok veamos si lo aceptan o no Arturo Duarte
• 2025/07/22 Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Aryan Karamtoth
• 2025/07/21 Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Luke W Faraone
• 2025/07/21 Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Aryan Karamtoth
• 2025/07/21 Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Maytham Alsudany
• 2025/07/20 Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license Aryan Karamtoth
• 2025/07/13 Re: Request for Permission to Use Logo for Merchandise Mya Htwe
• 2025/07/13 chats Mya Htwe
• 2025/07/13 chats Mya Htwe
• 2025/05/08 mingw-w64: Vague permission grant for embedded Cephes math lib mappu
• 2025/05/01 Ray wrestlingang186
• 2025/04/24 Re: dkopp license and copyright issue Michael Cornelison
• 2025/04/24 Re: Bug#987089: dkopp license and copyright issue debian-legal
• 2025/04/24 Re: dkopp license and copyright issue Francesco Poli
• 2025/04/24 Re: Bug#987089: dkopp license and copyright issue 肖盛文
• 2025/04/24 dkopp license and copyright issue Michael Cornelison
• 2025/04/23 Re: dkopp package copyright and license text Michael Cornelison
• 2025/04/22 Re: dkopp package copyright and license text Francesco Poli
• 2025/04/22 Re: dkopp package copyright and license text Soren Stoutner
• 2025/04/22 dkopp package copyright and license text Michael Cornelison
• 2025/04/19 Re: package dkopp new upstream version copyright Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 Unported Andrew M.A. Cater
• 2025/04/19 Re: package dkopp new upstream version copyright Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 Unported Francesco Poli
• 2025/04/19 Re: package dkopp new upstream version copyright Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 Unported Sven Geuer

• Earlier messages