On Tue, 15 Dec 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Not at all. Your "script" is parsed by bash, but not part of the
> > executable that has a process ID. When you link with a library, the
> > executable in memory contains both your code and code from the library.
> > The program "uses" them because
I wrote:
> I could accept a clause granting IBM these rights in the case that a court
> order is issued requiring the destruction of or payment of royalties for
> copies of the Software, but the mere perception of a threat of legal action
> is not enough.
Robert Levin writes:
> I'm not sure I coul
On Tue, Dec 15, 1998 at 07:23:18AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As long as it's still possible to ALSO support IIOP 1.0 with the
> > modified version, then there's no problem wrt the Sun license. If you
> > want to remove the IIOP support completely, then
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People can certainly modify TAO to support any standard they want (in
> fact, we're planning on doing this to support a DCOM/CORBA bridge
> shortly, as well as a wide variety of protocols other than IIOP 1.0).
> As long as it's still possible to ALSO suppo
I can't make sense of that sixth paragraph at all. Or rather, I can,
but the result doesn't seem reasonable. I can't even tell what they
are trying to accomplish. I certainly would never sign a contract
with this paragraph in it.
Dissection:
> In the event an intellectual property claim is mad
Hi guys,
Doug Schmidt just sent me a response that I think we at Debian may feel better
about. Hopefully his clarification will make us rethink our position on TAO's
license.
By the way, I really appreciate all the feedback I've been getting about this
issue. I realize that some of the things I
On 14 Dec 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I could accept a clause granting IBM these rights in the case that a court
> order is issued requiring the destruction of or payment of royalties for
> copies of the Software, but the mere perception of a threat of legal action
> is not enough.
I'm not su
Robert Levin quotes:
> In the event an intellectual property claim is made or appears likely to
> be made with respect to the Software, you agree to permit IBM to enable
> you to continue to use the Software, or to modify it, or replace it with
> software that is at least functionally equivalent.
On 14 Dec 1998, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> "Robert Levin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>In the event an intellectual property claim is made or appears likely
>to be made with respect to the Software, you agree to permit IBM to
>enable you to continue to use the Software, or to modify it, or
"Robert Levin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In the event an intellectual property claim is made or appears likely
to be made with respect to the Software, you agree to permit IBM to
enable you to continue to use the Software, or to modify it, or replace
it with software that is at least
Please read this carefully. You must agree to the following terms and
conditions before installing the Secure Mailer or any related
documentation ("Software"). If you do not agree to these terms
and conditions, you may not install or use the Software.
Permission to reproduce and create derivativ
Hi all,
I'm in the process of providing supporting documentation for a possible run
at IBM regarding problems with its license for Wietse Venema's 'postfix'
mail transport agent. I'm including a copy the license below. Address any
problems that seem significant within your own context. If it wo
Hi all,
Rob Levin at Open Projects has been in contact with some IBM people about
Postfix, as there seems to be some license issues. Could you guys please
talk with him about what you think about it? I'd really like a DFSG
resolution so we can make use of this mailer.
Thanks,
Jason
Ossama Othman writes:
> What if TAO code fragments could be used in other code besides TAO,
> probably forcing the other code to conform to the standard? Would this
> be "free" by your definition?
Of course not. What if I wanted to use the code in a circuit simulator or
a word processor?
--
Joh
Ossama writes:
> It so happens that patches don't become official until they go through
> Doug Schmidt's research group.
And if they aren't official they may not be legally distributed.
> If this isn't acceptable perhaps someone should tell Linus he shouldn't
> be the only one to make Linux patch
I was advised to repost this to here to get answers to my questions,
so here goes. The author is planning to place the package under a BSD
license.
m.
--- Begin Message ---
After a brief hunt for an mp3 encoder for my alpha, I discovered
this piece of software. It is an optimized version of
16 matches
Mail list logo
