Not entirely on-topic for this list, but I'd rather bounce this idea off
our kibitzers of law before looking to waste the time of SPIs legal
counsel. Even if the suggestion doesn't withstand a cost/benefit
analysis, I'm at least curious to know what options are available under
these circumstances.
Oops. I should have said "I'm not subscribed, please CC me". I've subscribed
now, and hope that I've not mangled things from the web archive that badly.
Jakob Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 01:33:44PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> > Jakob Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
Joe Wreschnig said:
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 16:27, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> I have to add a new section to my FDL FAQ. Here's a draft version:
>
> Excellent job; you might want to consider adding how the GFDL *is*
> about misrepresentation - If someone adds an invariant section contrary
> to you
Joe Wreschnig said:
> On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 12:55, Joe Moore wrote:
>> > You can extract the BSD-licensed code from the proprietary code, and
>> > use only it. There's no requirement in the BSD-licensed code that
>> > you must distribute proprietary code that it was linked to at one
>> > point.
>>
Brian T. Sniffen said:
>
> That's not true. The BSD license is granted to all third parties, so
> if I find a section of some proprietary code I know was written by UCB,
> I can just take that section. The GFDL is a license only to the
> recipient, so in order to take a free section from an older
In case anybody's interested, I've just commited the GPLv2 'LICENSE' into CVS,
to avoid further useless arguments.
(not subscribed)
--
Gabucino
MPlayer Core Team
pgpxdiM24T4om.pgp
Description: PGP signature
6 matches
Mail list logo
