On Sun, 2003-06-15 at 06:05, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Warner wrote:
> > Branden, perhaps the term "information disclosure" would better suit
> > you/us than "privacy"? That is we propose a DFSG-free licence cannot
> > mandate information disclosure of anything b
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Can someone remind me how exactly the license above is incompatible with
> > the GNU GPL? Material under this license seems as miscible with a work
> > under the GNU GPL as m
Hi
Am Fre, 2003-06-13 um 23.30 schrieb Anthony DeRobertis:
> On Friday, Jun 13, 2003, at 04:57 US/Eastern, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> >
> > "Unrestricted access to all not-common elements to produce the final
> > product is a precondition for this".
> > [...]
> > Humans
> > (non-common: the order
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Warner wrote:
> Branden, perhaps the term "information disclosure" would better suit
> you/us than "privacy"? That is we propose a DFSG-free licence cannot
> mandate information disclosure of anything but the information forming a
> distributed and derived work.
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can someone remind me how exactly the license above is incompatible with
> the GNU GPL? Material under this license seems as miscible with a work
> under the GNU GPL as materials under the 2- or 3-clause BSD licenses
> are.
"Provided that the entire
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 07:28:21PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:02:56 -0400
> Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > my question>
> >
> > I intend to make the effort some day, but first I have to finish GPL
> > version 3, which faces other difficult questions.
Dylan Thurston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One clear difference is that the FSF finds the FDL license to be free
> on their terms [...]
To my knowledge, the FSF have never claimed the FDL meets their definition
of free software. Can you show otherwise, please?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:31:05AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 22:02, Walter Landry wrote:
>
> > d) Accompany it with information as to how to obtain, for a charge
> > no more than the cost of physically performing source
> > distribution, corresponding sou
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 06:02:56PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> For instance, here is the license we used for most GNU manuals before
> the GFDL:
>
> Permission is granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this
> manual provided the copyright notice and this permission notice are
>
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 05:02:27PM -0400, Gregory K.Johnson wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I personally have advocated a fifth freedom:
> >
> > 5) The freedom to retain privacy in one's person, effects, and data,
> >including, but not limited to, all Works in one's po
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 03:50:24PM +1200, Adam Warner wrote:
> Branden, perhaps the term "information disclosure" would better suit
> you/us than "privacy"?
Sure, if that's agreeable to others.
> That is we propose a DFSG-free licence cannot mandate information
> disclosure of anything but the in
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 22:02, Walter Landry wrote:
> d) Accompany it with information as to how to obtain, for a charge
> no more than the cost of physically performing source
> distribution, corresponding source. (This alternative is allowed
> only for noncommercial distribution)
12 matches
Mail list logo
