> > BaseSoftware is under GPL (GNU Public License).
...
> > Small addition to GPL
> >
> > You may not remove the Designed by Obsidian link from the logon
> > screen, bypass the logon screen, remove or hide links to the "About"
> > box or remove the original author details from the code. - - - Sni
Christoph writes:
> If I make some modifications, they want to have a copy from me, but
> not from all the users.
I'm sure that is what they intended, but it isn't what they say in the
license. Do you have this in writing from them?
It's still postcardware.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joh
Christoph writes:
> As I understand it, they permit distribution of devired works, but they
> do not speak about REdestribution of the original. I think, they take
> this as granted.
They may take it for granted, but we can't. We can only do what they have
given us permission to do.
--
John Hasl
Richard Braakman writes:
> Also, it seems to permit distribution of derived works BUT NOT verbatim
> copies ("nontransferable license"), which is weird.
It certainly is weird.
And quotes:
> 1. STANFORD grants to LICENSEE a nonexclusive and nontransferable license
> to use, copy and modify the co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Richard Braakman writes:
> (Sent to debian-legal, Cc to package maintainer)
>
> I found this package in Incoming. I'm not sure if we can distribute
> it; clause 4 is a bit funny. Also, it seems to permit distribution of
> derived works BUT NOT verbatim co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho writes:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 1999 at 01:37:25PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > At the time
> > LICENSEE provides a copy of a derivative version of the Program to a
> > third party, LICENSEE shall provide STANFORD with one copy of the s
On Fri, Mar 05, 1999 at 01:37:25PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> At the time
> LICENSEE provides a copy of a derivative version of the Program to a
> third party, LICENSEE shall provide STANFORD with one copy of the source
> code of the derivative version at no charge to STANFORD.
This looks li
(Sent to debian-legal, Cc to package maintainer)
I found this package in Incoming. I'm not sure if we can distribute
it; clause 4 is a bit funny. Also, it seems to permit distribution of
derived works BUT NOT verbatim copies ("nontransferable license"),
which is weird.
The mrouted program is
thanks...
NatePuri
Certified Law Student
& Debian GNU/Linux Monk
McGeorge School of Law
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ompages.com
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, Randy Edwards wrote:
> > Can some one send me a copy of this license?
>
>I posted this here once, but you must've missed it Paul. Here is
> Obsi
On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 04:31:33PM -0800, Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
> > Just kidding. UW usually takes a while to respond. They told me that
> > distribution is ok if I append the letter "L" to the of the file (i.e.
> > pine-396L_i386.deb. And some legal disclaimer. In the dir where pine
> > will
On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 04:31:33PM -0800, Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
> I'm on it. "Hey, dub dub dub dub"
>
> Just kidding. UW usually takes a while to respond. They told me that
> distribution is ok if I append the letter "L" to the of the file (i.e.
> pine-396L_i386.deb. And some legal dis
Brian Ristuccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This sounds a lot like
Yes, but only the sound of it. GPL's:
| you must cause it, when started running for such
| interactive use in the most ordinary way,
implies that if I read through the manuals and know who made the thing
and know there's no wa
12 matches
Mail list logo
