Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 22:15, Joey Hess wrote: > I was amused the other day to find abiword, when I asked it to save a > document as html, offering to inline the images in the document in > base64 encoding. OK, I'll dig it up... RFC2397: > I'm not sure what b

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 09:52, Anthony Towns wrote: > I can't see how that's even meaningful. How do you make a soundfile part > of a text document? It'd no longer be a plain-text document. To take a random example, you could create a HyperCard stack (ignoring that HyperCard isn't free, for a momen

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

Anthony Towns wrote: > I can't see how that's even meaningful. How do you make a soundfile part > of a text document? I was amused the other day to find abiword, when I asked it to save a document as html, offering to inline the images in the document in base64 encoding. I'm not sure what browser

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Thu, 01 May 2003, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Sat, 26 Apr 2003, Henning Makholm wrote: >> But as we've found out now, the part of the GPL that is actually >> invariant is the preamble, which has no legal content... > > Can you provide me a reference upon which you are basing this > statement? I

Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software? (Was: query from Georg Greve of GNU about Debian's opinion of the FDL

> > On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 12:37, Henning Makholm wrote: > > > > >sub 2. The work must not be changed or made available to the public > > > in a way or in a context that violates the author's literary or > > > artistic reputation or character. > * Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: compatibility between Open Publication License and GNU GPL

On Thu, 1 May 2003, Tatsuya Kinoshita wrote: > Is the Open Publication License compatible with the GNU GPL? Not remotely. > The Open Publication License (http://opencontent.org/openpub/) > v1.0 says: > > | Any publication in standard (paper) book form shall require the > | citation of the origi

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003, Henning Makholm wrote: > But as we've found out now, the part of the GPL that is actually > invariant is the preamble, which has no legal content... I've seen this meme popping up in a couple of places. Can you provide me a reference upon which you are basing this statement?

Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software? (Was: query from Georg Greve of GNU about Debian's opinion of the FDL

* Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030501 12:56]: > On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 12:37, Henning Makholm wrote: > > >sub 2. The work must not be changed or made available to the public > > in a way or in a context that violates the author's literary or > > artistic reputation or cha

nano/bio convergence

Nanotech and biotech Convergence-2003 The Second Annual BCC Conference May 4-6, 2003; Holiday Inn Select, Stamford, CT, USA Register now-  www.bccresearch.com/nanobio2003 exhibiting and sponsership opportunites available (For Schedule of Invited Speakers, see below) Pre-Conference Workshop

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 01:53:14PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: > The definition of a Transparent copy is so implementation-specific > that a sound file can never be part of a GFDLed document. I think > this is a significant restriction on modification. I can't see how that's even meaningful. H

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 06:26:07PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Is it a consensus on debian-legal that a GFDL work *without* any > > Invariant or Cover is indeed free and has no problem being distributed > > in "main"? > > I believe so. There

compatibility between Open Publication License and GNU GPL

Is the Open Publication License compatible with the GNU GPL? The Open Publication License (http://opencontent.org/openpub/) v1.0 says: | I. REQUIREMENTS ON BOTH UNMODIFIED AND MODIFIED VERSIONS | Any publication in standard (paper) book form shall require the | citation of the original publisher

Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software?

On 1 May 2003, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Mark Rafn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Henning Makholm wrote: > > > > And I don't think that the author of a piece of software has any > > > "literary or artistic reputation or character" connected with it. > > > You don't? I thin

Re: query from Georg Greve of GNU about Debian's opinion of the FDL

Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > In any event, if non-common law countries have legal frameworks that > > technically render Free Software as conceived by the FSF and the Debian > > Project impossible, > > Pure FUD. See my rebuke of Nathanael Nerode's message that I just > sent. I t

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 12:15:32AM +0200, > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > a message of 33 lines which said: > > > ?) The GFDL is not free when applied to documents if any of > > the "invariant" or "cover" options are exerci