These are the items that iam interested in selling..
Could you help me with some details on the goods, history, origin etc.
are these worth anything and if so who would i contact with regards to
selling them? and the best way to sell them ie auction etc
APOLOGISE IF YOU HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED THIS
[-ocaml-maint cc trimmed]
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 01:12:47PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)
>1. Free Redistribution
>
> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
> selling or giving away the software as a com
Sven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, i think they grant the right to distribute it in electornic
> form, ity is just for the printed version that they don't want to
> give permission, thing that i consider normal for a book publisher.
Debian's standards are not governed by "what is normal for
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 05:28:54PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> > distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> > violate the DFSG.
>
> Which is false
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 10:50:06AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > > They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> > > distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> > > violate the DFSG.
> >
> > As someone who has packaged documentation before, I'm
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 05:28:54PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> > distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> > violate the DFSG.
>
> Which is false. The right to commercial redistribution for profit,
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 10:50:06AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> > distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> > violate the DFSG.
>
> As someone who has packaged documentation before, I'm surprised t
Scripsit Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> violate the DFSG.
Which is false. The right to commercial redistribution for profit, in
electronic form at the
TrafficWoW Daily Newsletter January 21, 2002
Disclaimer: --- This email is NEVER sent unsolicited. THIS IS
NOT SPAM. You are receiving this because you have either answered
classified ad, posted t
> They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial
> distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't
> violate the DFSG.
As someone who has packaged documentation before, I'm surprised that
Debian would agree with this. It's clearly non-free for software, and I
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 03:45:40PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> I hoped I made it clear that I'm unsure about the necessity of that.
> I'm soliciting comments from other debian-legal people.
I get an answer from O'Reilly, they told me that in their opinion the
reported notice (i.e. the text the
Scripsit Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 04:44:44AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > However, I'm not really sure whether the DFSG should also be read as
> > requiring the free right to make and sell hardcopies. One could argue
> > either way from the text of the D
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 04:44:44AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> However, I'm not really sure whether the DFSG should also be read as
> requiring the free right to make and sell hardcopies. One could argue
> either way from the text of the DFSG, I think.
>
> If the license you quoted were to app
13 matches
Mail list logo
