Re: Knuth statement on renaming cm files and Licence violation.

2002-09-06 Thread Martin Schröder
On 2002-09-06 18:59:45 -0400, Dylan Thurston wrote: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 03:35:17PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > The names could only be restricted if they are trademarked, which they > > are not. "Computer Modern" might be trademarked (I don't know), > > It is, as indicated in the

Re: Knuth statement on renaming cm files and Licence violation.

2002-09-06 Thread Dylan Thurston
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 03:35:17PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > > However, use of the names is restricted: > > > > This is a slightly odd statement, since (AFAIK) names cannot be > > restricted in the ways that follow. The crucial issue seems to be > > whether this statement (and what f

Re: Knuth statement on renaming cm files and Licence violation.

2002-09-06 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Dylan Thurston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > However, use of the names is restricted: > > This is a slightly odd statement, since (AFAIK) names cannot be > restricted in the ways that follow. The crucial issue seems to be > whether this statement (and what follows) are terms of the grant of >

Re: Knuth statement on renaming cm files and Licence violation.

2002-09-06 Thread Dylan Thurston
On Wed, 4 Sep, Brian Sniffen wrote: > Sadly, I don't own a copy of Computers & Typesetting. Can you quote > the full copyright page, and give a general indication of the contents > of Volume E? Somewhat surprisingly, no-one has done this completely yet. Computers & Typesetting, Volume E, Compu

Re: A GNU GPL question (might be slightly OT)

2002-09-06 Thread Mark Rafn
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Fredrik Persson wrote: > I'm in a situation where I am trying to get the source code for a program > from the company that distributed that program, and this has turned out > to be really difficult. Currently, I'm preparing a reply to their lawyer (I > have no legal training my

Re: A GNU GPL question (might be slightly OT)

2002-09-06 Thread David Turner
On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 11:03, Fredrik Persson wrote: > Is this a loophole in the GPL? If my question above is answered with > "Jim", I think it is. If the answer is "Jill", it most likely is not. > > So... > > What do you all say about this? I say that the answer is "Jim," but that this is not as

Re: A GNU GPL question (might be slightly OT)

2002-09-06 Thread Spencer H Visick
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho on Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 07:52:06PM +0300 wrote: > The FSF may be a better place. They have a mailing address for > licensing questions but I forget what it was. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Spencer Hal Visick Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www

Re: A GNU GPL question (might be slightly OT)

2002-09-06 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On 20020906T180308+0200, Fredrik Persson wrote: > This may be slightly OT, but I have really looked around for a better place > to ask this question, and failed. The FSF may be a better place. They have a mailing address for licensing questions but I forget what it was. > That is my question. W

Timidity-patches eek

2002-09-06 Thread David Given
I've been looking at the timidity-patches package, because I've been looking for a decent MIDI patch set for an unrelated project, and that patch set is a good one. The package has no license. Looking into it, timidity-patches turns out to have been put together from patch files taken from the Mi

A GNU GPL question (might be slightly OT)

2002-09-06 Thread Fredrik Persson
Hello! This may be slightly OT, but I have really looked around for a better place to ask this question, and failed. I'm in a situation where I am trying to get the source code for a program from the company that distributed that program, and this has turned out to be really difficult. Currently

Re: Debian registered by a trade as TM in Spain!

2002-09-06 Thread Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
> We [CEINTEC] know that this person has never oposed to the use of Debian > and, of course, that person guarantees that this won't happen in the future > (while the GNU philosophy is respected). I don't this this guarantee is worth the paper it's printed on. > We [CEINTEC] also know that he/she

Unidentified subject!

2002-09-06 Thread Ignacio García Fernández
>From ignacio Fri Sep 6 11:56:41 2002 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivery-date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:56:41 +0200 Received: from shannon ([147.156.161.144] helo=localhost ident=ignacio) by shannon with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17n

Re: Do Debian patches violate the GPL?

2002-09-06 Thread Santiago Vila
Martin Schulze wrote: > BUT: If we distribute scripts (shell, Perl, Python etc.) or PHP > files, that are patched before they are packed into a .deb file, > they normally don't contain such notices, even though the GPL seems > to require them, and we do distribute plain files in these cases. In ge

Do Debian patches violate the GPL?

2002-09-06 Thread Martin Schulze
The GNU GPL says: 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that