Subject: Re: New Drink
From: TechnoAtheist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: rec.humor.oracle.d
"Freyja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sex In A Gnu.
>
0. This License applies to any beverage or other work which contains a
notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under
the
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Clay Crouch wrote:
> > The license does not restrict the _distribution_ of it. It can be
> > sold as part of an aggregate.
> >
> > So, I am not sure Clause 1 (Free Redistribution) of the DFSG applies.
> > It is Clause 6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of
Clay Crouch wrote:
> The license does not restrict the _distribution_ of it. It can be
> sold as part of an aggregate.
>
> So, I am not sure Clause 1 (Free Redistribution) of the DFSG applies.
> It is Clause 6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor) that
> troubles me And I am not %100
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Clay Crouch wrote:
> > So, to the "brass tacks". Is requiring payment for commercial exploitation
> > considered 'discrimination' WRT the DFSG?
>
> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
>
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Steve M Bibayoff wrote:
> I haven't looked at the license in a while for Code Crusader, but doesn't
> it also have some type of restrictons on code changes also? Like make
> changes and redisribute them w/o telling the orginal authours?
It does not restrict that, but is does
Subject: Re: New Drink
From: TechnoAtheist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: rec.humor.oracle.d
"Freyja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sex In A Gnu.
>
0. This License applies to any beverage or other work which contains a
notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under
th
I haven't looked at the license in a while for Code Crusader, but doesn't
it also have some type of restrictons on code changes also? Like make
changes and redisribute them w/o telling the orginal authours?
Steve
___
If Microsoft doesn't trust Wi
Clay Crouch wrote:
> So, to the "brass tacks". Is requiring payment for commercial exploitation
> considered 'discrimination' WRT the DFSG?
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
^^^
selling
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, SCOTT FENTON wrote:
> AFAIK, if it needs payment for commercial use, then it's discriminating
> against commercial use, isn't it?
[Snipped beginning of thread]
Well That is the problem I ran up against; the Anti-Discrimination
clauses in the DFSG. That is why I am as
AFAIK, if it needs payment for commercial use, then it's discriminating
against commercial use, isn't it?
Clay Crouch wrote:
>
> Greets! :^)
>
> I intend to package Code Crusader (jcc) and Code Medic (medic).
> These two programs have DFSG-compliant (though non-GPL) licenses.
> I have attatched
Greets! :^)
I intend to package Code Crusader (jcc) and Code Medic (medic).
These two programs have DFSG-compliant (though non-GPL) licenses.
I have attatched their licenses, if anyone wants to check them over.
However, both of them depend on the JX Application Framework,
which may or may not be
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Clay Crouch wrote:
> > The license does not restrict the _distribution_ of it. It can be
> > sold as part of an aggregate.
> >
> > So, I am not sure Clause 1 (Free Redistribution) of the DFSG applies.
> > It is Clause 6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of
Clay Crouch wrote:
> The license does not restrict the _distribution_ of it. It can be
> sold as part of an aggregate.
>
> So, I am not sure Clause 1 (Free Redistribution) of the DFSG applies.
> It is Clause 6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor) that
> troubles me And I am not %100
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Clay Crouch wrote:
> > So, to the "brass tacks". Is requiring payment for commercial exploitation
> > considered 'discrimination' WRT the DFSG?
>
> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
>
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Steve M Bibayoff wrote:
> I haven't looked at the license in a while for Code Crusader, but doesn't
> it also have some type of restrictons on code changes also? Like make
> changes and redisribute them w/o telling the orginal authours?
It does not restrict that, but is does
I haven't looked at the license in a while for Code Crusader, but doesn't
it also have some type of restrictons on code changes also? Like make
changes and redisribute them w/o telling the orginal authours?
Steve
___
If Microsoft doesn't trust W
Clay Crouch wrote:
> So, to the "brass tacks". Is requiring payment for commercial exploitation
> considered 'discrimination' WRT the DFSG?
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
^^^
selling
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, SCOTT FENTON wrote:
> AFAIK, if it needs payment for commercial use, then it's discriminating
> against commercial use, isn't it?
[Snipped beginning of thread]
Well That is the problem I ran up against; the Anti-Discrimination
clauses in the DFSG. That is why I am a
AFAIK, if it needs payment for commercial use, then it's discriminating
against commercial use, isn't it?
Clay Crouch wrote:
>
> Greets! :^)
>
> I intend to package Code Crusader (jcc) and Code Medic (medic).
> These two programs have DFSG-compliant (though non-GPL) licenses.
> I have attatched
Greets! :^)
I intend to package Code Crusader (jcc) and Code Medic (medic).
These two programs have DFSG-compliant (though non-GPL) licenses.
I have attatched their licenses, if anyone wants to check them over.
However, both of them depend on the JX Application Framework,
which may or may not be
20 matches
Mail list logo
