Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would say that the controlling preference is that of the person who
> last modified the Work and distributed it in that modified form. Anyone
> downstream from that person would have to keep the "source" in that form
> and the "binary" together.
I t
ate) actual signed license agreements plus a distrtibution
fee. The actual license agreement (as of 4.4BSD-Lite in 1994) was two
dense pages of text and definately a contract.
Take care,
Greg Pomerantz
(this is not legal advice)
> > > They are also not enforceable in the US.
> >
> > Can you please provide a citation for this? I've never been able to come
> > up with one.
>
> This is what I know from Eben Moglen; I would ask him if he can give
> you more exact citations. Also maybe look at the briefs that AT&T
> filed in
AME to make copy protected CDs (see
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-277197.html). How is it stupid if the LAME
developers walk into a moral rights jurisdiction and ask Universal to
stop?
Best regards,
Greg Pomerantz
ever intended the
work to be used for some particular evil use (for example because they
never imagined that particular use)?
Best regards,
Greg Pomerantz
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 12:34:36PM +0200,
> Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 30 lines which said:
>
> But it is not a real problem. Under the "droit d'auteur", the author's
> right over *software* is quite limited, (unlike other work, such as
> books). For instance
6 matches
Mail list logo
