According to Joseph Carter:
> Okay guys, how about a few suggestions?
Well, you could use the term "OSI-Certified Open Source" as an
unambiguous description of open source licenses. (Unless you don't
like OSI's certifications, of course.)
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -
Okay guys, how about a few suggestions?
--
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3
Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC
The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
if macOS is for the computer
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:06:35PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Until now there was no threat for a lawsuit, but if they want they can try
> it with EVERYONE who sells a CD - and if they want they can pick a very
> small one (I think of that there is currently someone in Germany who has a
> trademar
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:06:35PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > mp3 Software Decoders/Players distributed free-of-charge via the Internet
> > >for personal use of end-users
> > >
> > > No license fee is expected for desktop software mp3 decoders/players
> > >
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> severity 65794 normal
> severity 65796 normal
> severity 65797 normal
> thanks
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:27:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > freeamp is a MP3 decoder. Decoding of MP3s is patented.
> >
> > http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/swdec.
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:06:35PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Until now there was no threat for a lawsuit, but if they want they can try
> it with EVERYONE who sells a CD - and if they want they can pick a very
> small one (I think of that there is currently someone in Germany who has a
> tradema
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:06:35PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > mp3 Software Decoders/Players distributed free-of-charge via the Internet
> > >for personal use of end-users
> > >
> > > No license fee is expected for desktop software mp3 decoders/players
> >
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> severity 65794 normal
> severity 65796 normal
> severity 65797 normal
> thanks
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:27:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > freeamp is a MP3 decoder. Decoding of MP3s is patented.
> >
> > http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/swdec
severity 65794 normal
severity 65796 normal
severity 65797 normal
thanks
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:27:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> freeamp is a MP3 decoder. Decoding of MP3s is patented.
>
> http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/swdec.html
> says about license fees for MP3 decoders:
>
> mp3
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 12:51:58PM -0400, Brian Almeida wrote:
> Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
> main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
> ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
>
> Please Cc me on replies, I am
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 12:51:58PM -0400, Brian Almeida wrote:
> Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
> main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
> ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
>
> Please Cc me on replies, I am
Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
Please Cc me on replies, I am not on -legal.
- Forwarded message from Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECT
severity 65794 normal
severity 65796 normal
severity 65797 normal
thanks
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:27:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> freeamp is a MP3 decoder. Decoding of MP3s is patented.
>
> http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/swdec.html
> says about license fees for MP3 decoders:
>
> mp3
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 12:51:58PM -0400, Brian Almeida wrote:
> Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
> main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
> ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
>
> Please Cc me on replies, I a
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 12:51:58PM -0400, Brian Almeida wrote:
> Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
> main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
> ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
>
> Please Cc me on replies, I a
Opinions? I thought that it had been decided that mp3 decoders were ok for
main... I've maintained an mp3 player since I became a maintainer two years
ago, first with emusic, now with freeamp...
Please Cc me on replies, I am not on -legal.
- Forwarded message from Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTEC
I wrote:
> Exporting an API is what the kernel does. If binary kernel modules are
> restricted by the GPL so are all other programs.
>
> Perhaps Linux should be licensed under the LGPL, to solve this issue?
By the way, this was a rhetorical suggestion.
--
Raul
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:20:21PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> From the reiserfs mailinglist:
>
> Hans Reiser wrote:
> > I am quite happy if folks suggest better phrasing than what I use.
To solve incompatability with the GPL:
Replace:
> +Since that license (particularly 2.b) is necessarily
Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 05:16:11PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > And I would still recommend a less ambiguous phrasing.
>
> I agree. I hope there is a chance to get it changed.
Hans seems to be willing to accept a better wording. So if someone
can come up with
I wrote:
> Exporting an API is what the kernel does. If binary kernel modules are
> restricted by the GPL so are all other programs.
>
> Perhaps Linux should be licensed under the LGPL, to solve this issue?
By the way, this was a rhetorical suggestion.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:20:21PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> From the reiserfs mailinglist:
>
> Hans Reiser wrote:
> > I am quite happy if folks suggest better phrasing than what I use.
To solve incompatability with the GPL:
Replace:
> +Since that license (particularly 2.b) is necessaril
Just a few words from the most autoritative source - The GPL itself:
10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free
programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author
to ask for permission. For software which is copyrighted by the Free
Software Founda
Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 05:16:11PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > And I would still recommend a less ambiguous phrasing.
>
> I agree. I hope there is a chance to get it changed.
Hans seems to be willing to accept a better wording. So if someone
can come up wit
Just a few words from the most autoritative source - The GPL itself:
10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free
programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author
to ask for permission. For software which is copyrighted by the Free
Software Found
24 matches
Mail list logo
