Re: mono and moonlight distribution method make me worried.

Thank you for the detailed exploration of your understanding of these issues. saulgo...@flashingtwelve.brickfilms.com writes: > Not to conflate the issues of patent licensing with copyright > licensing, but if […] , the Mono implementation should fail Debian > Legal's "Desert Island" and "Disside

Re: mono and moonlight distribution method make me worried.

Quoting "Bradley M. Kuhn" : Steve Langasek wrote at 19:58 (EDT) on Sunday: we don't consider the existence of a software patent claim to be a sufficient reason to remove software from main. Well said. There are so many USA patents, if you tried to remove every piece of software from main th

Re: Files with unclear licenses in non-free

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Robert Wohlrab wrote: > It has no license headers, it is not mentioned in the LICENSE file and > http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?t=45564 seems to indicate that > mupen64plus developers don't know the license situation either. > Summary: Orkin (developler of g

Re: Is "IPA Font license" DFSG-Free?

In message <1243789213.18376.224.ca...@tomoyo>, Josselin Mouette writes Le dimanche 31 mai 2009 à 20:52 +0900, Hideki Yamane a écrit : I've ITPed IPAfont as otf-ipafont package. You can see its license at http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ipafont.html Please give me your feedback (Please

Re: Files with unclear licenses in non-free

> Is there any indication that the glN64 dir is under a different > license to the rest of the code? It has no license headers, it is not mentioned in the LICENSE file and http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?t=45564 seems to indicate that mupen64plus developers don't know the license situation