I have been teaching an information law course for a while
at a university here in DC, and had a very successful run
at doing the course in an online only section this last
semester using moodle.org (PHP/Mysql based teaching
package) developed by Martin Dougiamas.
I'd spoken to Brandon about offer
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, please, write licenses for the audience at (3).
Isn't the GPL essentially a counterexample? It was written with legal
counsel, and many people have criticised it for it complexity. It has
also been an effective license that doesn't have any explo
Jeff Licquia writes:
> Let me try to improve on Branden's version, phrased a little differently
> so it becomes a new 5.a.2:
>
> "The entire Derived Work, including the Base Format, does not identify
> itself as the original, unmodified Work to the user in any way when
> run."
>
> This w
Branden Robinson writes:
> Mandating technologies in license documents really rubs me the wrong
> way.
I'm not too happy about it either, but ...
> The nice(?) thing about legal language is that you can use broad
> terms to say what you mean, and as long as your meaning is clear and
> una
Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Let me try to improve on Branden's version, phrased a little differently
> so it becomes a new 5.a.2:
> "The entire Derived Work, including the Base Format, does not identify
> itself as the original, unmodified Work to the user in any way when
> run."
On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 12:18, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 04:56:28PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> > > Uh, better yet, let's use what the GPL's wording *should* be. See the
> > > PHPNuke thread.
> >
> > I'd agree, except that I don't think there was any consensus (or even
> > su
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 04:56:28PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> > Uh, better yet, let's use what the GPL's wording *should* be. See the
> > PHPNuke thread.
>
> I'd agree, except that I don't think there was any consensus (or even
> suggestion, but my memory is imperfect) on what such a wording shou
Title: assoagenti
Anno-III- n° 7
On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 18:56, Mark Rafn wrote:
> [Branden]
> > Why not say something like:
> > "If you distribute modified copies of the work, you must ensure that its
> > modified status is clearly, unambiguously, and obviously communicated to
> > users of the work."?
>
> IMO, this is non-free wit
On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 17:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 11:39:44AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Right, but as I just posted a little bit ago, a restriction to a problem
> > domain is just one type of specificity. See the GPL, section 2c, for
> > another, one that I think i
10 matches
Mail list logo
