Oops, my example is less useful than it should have been because of a DNS
problem.
My "Big Beard Agreement" distribution of GCC may be found at
http://ishmael.loyalty.org/~sigma/reductiones-ab-absurda/big-beard-software/
--
Seth David Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | And do not say, I will study w
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 02:21:08AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
>
> You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
> are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
>
On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Henning Makholm writes:
> > Note that you won't be able to include any GPLed software in your
> > distribution if you want to make restrictions about how and when
> > other people or corporations are allowed to redistribute it.
>
> Where does the GPL
Peter S Galbraith writes:
> Seth David Schoen wrote:
>
> > Henning Makholm writes:
> >
> > > Caspian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making
> > > > a
> > > > completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a lice
Joseph Carter writes:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 02:21:08AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
> >
> > You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
> > are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
> > contam
Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Henning Makholm writes:
>
> > Caspian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
> > > completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
> > > prohibits putzen like those at Corel
Henning Makholm writes:
> Caspian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
> > completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
> > prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort of nonsense
> > th
FYI, I just got this (anonymous) reply from Corel.
Peter
--- Forwarded Message
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:45:55 -0500
From: "Feedback Linux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free Download End User License Agreement
Hi Peter,
Sorry I was not able to
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 08:08:25AM -0500, Caspian wrote:
> Thus, I am wondering if anything can be done. Can there not be a license
> made so that a given piece of software cannot be used to fill the pockets
> of greedy people-- or at least so that it would be exceedingly difficult
> to do so?
Sur
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 01:28:52PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
> > are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
> > contaminating license.
>
> No, they are just selecting who *they* want to distribute
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 04:33:58AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 02:21:08AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> If there is _ANY_ EULA that you must agree to before you can have the GPL
> code it's forcing you to agree to their proprietary software terms.
This is just plain wrong.
On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Perhaps before suggesting that the DFSG is too lenient you should actually
> read it first and second figure out what exactly it allows that is too
> lenient. I admit I'm curious, however I'm more or less convinced by the
> tone of your message (and all
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 06:25:40AM -0500, Caspian wrote:
> I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
> completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
> prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort of nonsense
> they've been pullin
On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 02:21:08AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
>
> You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
> are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
> contaminating license. But please note th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
> are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
> contaminating license.
No, they are just selecting who *they* want to distribute the software
to. You don't have t
Maybe at this point, what's really needed is something -stricter- than the
GPL. Companies are already starting to walk all over the spirit-- if not
the letter-- of the GPL...just one idea, eh?
On 1 Dec 1999, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Caspian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd just like to stat
Caspian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
> completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
> prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort of nonsense
> they've been pulling,
Note that you wo
I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort of nonsense
they've been pulling, (i.e. a license even stricter than Debian's) I'd
love to help
From: Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
You may have a point. If you have to click something that says you
are 18 _before_ you download the GPL part, that's probably part of a
contaminating license. But please note that my original criticism never
e
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 10:54:42AM -0700, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I looked at the web page you sent me. It does not seem to violate
> the GPL as regards the GPL-covered programs included in it,
> although there are some subtle issues I haven't yet figured out.
>
> It does say that some non-free
20 matches
Mail list logo
