hen you'd never be able to provide a compatible free software
alternative to *any* proprietary solution.
--
Christian Kastner
pile babel_interface.c into
a binary result, but this command.h could theoretically be provided by
another implementation, licensed under different terms.
Hence why Steve wrote that this amounts to "[...] asserting copyright
on an interface."
--
Christian Kastner
On 20.02.19 21:30, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 20.02.19 11:37, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
>> This is starting to be a bit theoretical,
^^^
This particular sentence got dropped from my previous reply -- sorry!
> No, not this particular example we were discussing [...]
ultimately
always been up to ftp-master, so only they can answer that, sorry.
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 16:06, Christian Kastner wrote:
>>
>> Licensee being fooled by the translation implies that they assigned (at
>> least some) value to the translation, which is something that
stated for this this specific case. It's not
impossible,
or even uncommon, to challenge disclaimers in general, but this one here
is pretty clear-cut).
--
Christian Kastner
ost certainly not consider the English text, as it
declares itself to be legally void.
> In no way it states that the translation is "rubbish" as Joerg called it.
It may be useful from a user's perspective, but not from a legal
standpoint, which I guess is what matters most to ftp-master.
--
Christian Kastner
On 2015-02-16 20:55, Riley Baird wrote:
> Are confidentiality notices legally enforceable?
TTBOMK, no. You need prior consent for it to be binding (with NDAs this
is more obvious as they have the "agreement" part right there in the name).
There are probably exceptions, for example government-clas
7 matches
Mail list logo
