On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 07:12:27PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> There is a section in the Danish copyright law which reads, "one who
> has permission to use a computer program may make such copies as are
> necessary to use it".
For comparison, the Finnish law says,
"Joka on laillisesti hankki
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 09:27:05AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > Tomasz Wegrzanowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > What kind of free licence make such situations possible ???
> > > (for me it is not free even a little bit if author can change
> > > his mind and take away your freedom)
>
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 02:37:00PM +0100, Marc van Leeuwen wrote:
> Indeed
>
>a) REMIND may not be used under Microsoft Windows (3.0, 3.1, 95
> or NT) or any future version of Windows. Such use constitutes
> a violation of copyright.
>
>b) REMIND may not be used by Cadabra De
Marc van Leeuwen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, I recall reading in a message last week that a copyright licence
> cannot restrict the use of the copyrighted material,
There is not universal agreement about that. Some people argue that
running a program involves creating a copy of it in t
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 03:51:09PM +0100, Marc van Leeuwen wrote:
> > ;# Use and redistribution for ANY PURPOSE are granted as long as all
> > ;# copyright notices are retained. Redistribution with modification is
> > ;# allowed provided that you make your modified version distinguishable
> > ;#
> ;# Use and redistribution for ANY PURPOSE are granted as long as all
> ;# copyright notices are retained. Redistribution with modification is
> ;# allowed provided that you make your modified version distinguishable
> ;# from the original one. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR
> ;# ``A
Hi,
I talked with the author of jcode.pl again, and
the following is the new draft we worked out:
;# Use and redistribution for ANY PURPOSE are granted as long as all
;# copyright notices are retained. Redistribution with modification is
;# allowed provided that you make your modified version
Henning Makholm wrote:
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What kind of free licence make such situations possible ???
> > (for me it is not free even a little bit if author can change
> > his mind and take away your freedom)
I'd be surprised if this were enforcable, and it
On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Dec 13, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > I'm told that under American law, a promise that is made without
> > getting something tangible (a "consideration") in return cannot be
> > legally binding. That would seem to allow any free software license
> > to
> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 04:37:16PM +0100, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> > > We have software which don't qualify into debian
> > > main distribution because the licence is GPL but with a special clause:
> > > can't be used on microsoft operating s
On Dec 13, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What kind of free licence make such situations possible ???
> > (for me it is not free even a little bit if author can change
> > his mind and take away your freedom)
>
> I'm told that under American law, a
Tomasz Wegrzanowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What kind of free licence make such situations possible ???
> (for me it is not free even a little bit if author can change
> his mind and take away your freedom)
I'm told that under American law, a promise that is made without
getting something
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 09:50:59AM -0800, Joel Klecker wrote:
> No it's not, it's because binaries made from modified source are not
> distributable.
>
> >It might just be simpler for everybody to talk to UW about it. Life would
> >be much easier if they just BSD'd it or put it under Artistic (yu
13 matches
Mail list logo
