David Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 14:45, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > Oh, I remember this. The sophists at UWash claim that:
> > >
> > > "Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> > > documentation for any purpose and without fee
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:45:25AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it turns out that the UWash lawyers were right about
> > the way these clauses are understood by the courts; it sucks, but
> > there it is. They didn't create th
On Monday 11 November 2002 11:02 am, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Fortunately, the lzw patent expires this coming June.
Is that true? That would be really nice! (Finally, I can support buggy
old browsers in my web application). No sarcasm -- lots of people are still
using them, and I'd like to u
I saw recently that there was a problem with OpenOffice having LZW
patented code in its source. I imagine this kind or similar problems have
effected other packages.
There has been an interesting thread on the comp.compression newsgroup
that I have been watching. I've been waiting to see if more d
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:06:55PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:45:25AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it turns out that the UWash lawyers were right about
> > the way these clauses are understood by the courts; it sucks, but
> > there it is. T
On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 14:45, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Oh, I remember this. The sophists at UWash claim that:
> >
> > "Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> > documentation for any purpose and without fee to the University of
> > Washington is hereby grante
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:45:25AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Unfortunately, it turns out that the UWash lawyers were right about
> the way these clauses are understood by the courts; it sucks, but
> there it is. They didn't create the distinction, they just decided to
> use it.
So the
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's outrageous. UWash was going to sue the FSF for infringment of an
> BSD-style license when it's plainly obvious that no infringement was
> taking place?
No, they argued that there was infringement.
> Oh, I remember this. The sophists at UWas
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:16:20AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:32:00PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 10:27:27AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:20:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > > > Yes, thought so, since the
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:32:00PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 10:27:27AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:20:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Yes, thought so, since the GPL only applies on redistribution, not on
> > > something you do in-hous
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 10:27:27AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:20:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Yes, thought so, since the GPL only applies on redistribution, not on
> > something you do in-house.
>
> > But i think it would be fine to have the exemption and th
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:20:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Yes, thought so, since the GPL only applies on redistribution, not on
> something you do in-house.
> But i think it would be fine to have the exemption and the
> redistribution rights of the proprietary .o nonethless.
If the exemptio
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 10:15:50AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:06:33PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > > > What would be needed for the proprietary part ? A licence stating that
> > > > it is ok to distribute it and link it with the GPLed driver ? Would that
> > > > b
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:06:33PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > What would be needed for the proprietary part ? A licence stating that
> > > it is ok to distribute it and link it with the GPLed driver ? Would that
> > > be enough ?
> > Permission to redistribute both the .o files, and binary k
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 10:02:03AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 04:38:40PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > > If their code is GPL with an exemption, and the library they use is
> > > non-free and we can legally redistribute it, and the two pieces of code
> > > will be dis
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 04:38:40PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > If their code is GPL with an exemption, and the library they use is
> > non-free and we can legally redistribute it, and the two pieces of code
> > will be distributed together, this can be uploaded to non-free. Note
> > that being
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:32:34AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:15:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > I am about to send upstream my latest advice on the licence issues i
> > discussed here previously, and have one last question.
>
> > To recapitulate, upstream is p
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:15:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> I am about to send upstream my latest advice on the licence issues i
> discussed here previously, and have one last question.
> To recapitulate, upstream is packaging a pci adsl modem driver, which
> use a software library to do the A
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > You forgot to mention:
> >
> > * The lack of source.
>
> That can probably be worked around:
> As I said elsewhere, they can't make it available, because they no
> longer have it (um, I can't seem to find where I read that, so I might
Sorry, I didn't r
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 01:54:43PM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Hm, it seems that we're actually a surprisingly large part of the way to
> > being DFSG-free here. There are two stumbling blocks:
> >
> > * There's no explicit permission to distribute
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hm, it seems that we're actually a surprisingly large part of the way to
> being DFSG-free here. There are two stumbling blocks:
>
> * There's no explicit permission to distribute as part of things that
> aren't emulators. This is more serious than it loo
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:37:59AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> Hm, it seems that we're actually a surprisingly large part of the way to
> being DFSG-free here. There are two stumbling blocks:
>
> * There's no explicit permission to distribute as part of things that
> aren't emulators. This
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 08:42:12AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:27:15AM +0100, Radovan Garabik wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 08:49:21PM +, Darren Salt wrote:
> > > It depends on spectrum-roms and must therefore go in contrib.
> >
> > We had a discussion abour ZX R
Hello, ...
I am about to send upstream my latest advice on the licence issues i
discussed here previously, and have one last question.
To recapitulate, upstream is packaging a pci adsl modem driver, which
use a software library to do the ADSL decoding. They don't have the
source to this library t
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> > Is there any way for xmedcon to become official without taking those parts
> > mentioned above out of the source code (which neither the upstream author
> > nor
> > me would find very attractive).
>
> Nope. We cannot distribute software that doesn't
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 04:41:04PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Andrea Borgia wrote:
> > Does anyone know of some free software that walks like Pine, talks like Pine
> > and looks like Pine but in fact is not Pine? (something like nano instead of
> > pico, mutt-fans please hands off the keyboard)
Hi guys,
please keep [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the Cc:
I'm seeking the opinion of -legal regarding an issue I've been
discussing on another mailing list. It pertains the YAST license as
found in:
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/8.1/COPYRIGHT.yast
To make this clear from the start: I
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 01:54:13PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I seriously believe that Debian should follow pine license strictly
> and not accept any special permission "only for Debian".
>
> This is written in the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and I believe
> it's a guideline we should fol
28 matches
Mail list logo
