ost all common licences except GPLv2 (though
that might not be true with the additional conditions of AGPLv3). If
anyone has made a decision to use GPLv2-only then I wouldn't expect them
to relicense for this. Therefore a BSD-licensed libdb is still needed.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Life
nse when you remember
> that the AGPLv3 is not compatable with the GPLv2
>
> I'm still against removing it from the archive.
But the new version should not build the default libdb-dev, as that is
likely to result in unintended GPLv2/v3 combinations that cannot be
distributed.
Ben.
.
> Though from what I've read on debian-legal this should be okay as the patent
> is not actively enforced.
Since you've accepted as fact that this software infringes those
patents, it looks like you're about to violate item 1 of the Debian
patent policy.
Ben.
--
Ben
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 03:32 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 10, "brian m. carlson" wrote:
>
> > I don't know about you, but I'd much prefer to modify any sort of
> > program, firmware or not, using C or assembly rather than editing the
> > binary directly. I suspect that this is the case for
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 13:33 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 12:25:10PM +0100, Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 12:22 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:00:06AM +0100, Ben Hutchings <[
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 12:22 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:00:06AM +0100, Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > But if I rename before uploading the package to Debian, then that
> > provision is nullified. So I think the licence would th
s
with Firefox/Iceweasel, as I expected[2]. (However, there is already an
icewm, so I can't take quite the same approach. :-))
[1] http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/ion-general/2007-April/001967.html
[2] http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/ion-general/2007-March/001827.html
Ben.
--
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This one time, at band camp, Francesco Poli said:
> > > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 19:27:57 +0100 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > >
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 18:26 -0400, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 27/04/07, Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The author of Ion3 (which I maintain) is proposing to introduce a new
> > licence[1] which includes the clause:
> >
> > > 3. Redistr
kage name change. Any other opinion
on that?
Ben.
[1] http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/ion-general/2007-April/001959.html
--
Ben Hutchings
If God had intended Man to program,
we'd have been born with serial I/O ports.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
an implementation, so only distributing binaries that
include the claimed invention could infringe. I'm not sure whether this
has been legally tested.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
If God had intended Man to program,
we'd have been born with serial I/O ports.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
POSE AND
NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE
LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION
OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION
-WITH THE RECORDING OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE RECORDING.
+WITH THE
[Sorry for the dupe, Don. I meant to reply only to these lists.]
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 15 May 2006, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Thanks for the diff.
> This is pretty much is just the XFree86 license; I don't think there's
> any problem with works under this licence be
Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Mon, 15 May 2006 03:34:12 +0100 Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > This is a proposed licence text for the Debconf video recordings
> > (and potentially other audio and video recordings), based on the MIT/X
> > licence:
> >
> > He
could legally remove the
copyright notice and permission notice?
The lack of a clear distinction between source and binary for video
means that the licence is much more like copyleft than the originali
(but without any mention of a preferred form). Does anyone on the
video team see this as a problem?
15 matches
Mail list logo
