The packages libxine1, ffmpeg, include libfaad*, libx264* or another
codec which implement the MPEG-4 Advanced Audio Coding and Advanced
Video Coding standards. Unfortunately, these are patent encumbered in at
least the USA, and many other countries. To distribute code implementing
any of these pa
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:17:39 GMT NeuRoTiX wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > The only (recommended) copyleft license that is GPL-compatible is
> > the GNU GPL itself. Current version is 2.0:
> > http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.txt
>
> Is it the same I got doing "man gpl"?
It seems so..
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 01:55:55 +0200 Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Do I need to get the copyright holder of the documents to
> relicense it under the GPL? It seems clear to me that it
> already is covered by the GPL, but it shouldn't be a
> problem to get the copyright holder to explicitly state
> that.
Ye
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 07:10:59PM +0100, Matthew William Solloway Bell wrote:
> Justification: Policy 2.3 - Copyright considerations
This has nothing to do with copyright. This is a question of patent
infringement. Please do not conflate these two areas of law.
> This package includes libfaad
"Frank Gevaerts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
When I packaged foobillard 3.0a, I correctly removed the included
non-free larabie ttf fonts, but I accidentally forgot to remove the
associated README.FONTS file, which contains the license for these
fonts. Is th
Francesco Poli wrote:
> The only (recommended) copyleft license that is GPL-compatible is the
> GNU GPL itself. Current version is 2.0:
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.txt
Is it the same I got doing "man gpl"?
I see that there is a license "for artworks" that is called to be the
"GPL
6 matches
Mail list logo
