Re: MTL license

2004-09-13 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 17:56:53 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 02:35:05PM -0700, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote: > > As well, the fact that is is framed as a "license agreement" invokes > > contract law instead of pure copyright.

Re: MTL license

2004-09-13 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
eople. > > Michael Poole > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall UC Berkeley, SIMS PhD Student http://pobox.com/~joehall/ blog: http://pobox.com/~joehall/nqb2/

Re: Free Art License

2004-09-09 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
IMHO, looks like a free software, copyleft license. Any other thoughts out there? -Joe -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall http://pobox.com/~joehall/

Re: GPL-licensed packages with depend-chain to OpenSSL

2004-09-06 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 09:53:35 +0100, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2004-09-06 02:24:58 +0100 Joseph Lorenzo Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > There are definitely implicit copyright licenses in (US) copyright > > case law. > > In general, tha

Re: GPL-licensed packages with depend-chain to OpenSSL

2004-09-05 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
tent that they're copyrightable) in my work. Of course, specific details can always change things in court. -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Re: GPL-licensed packages with depend-chain to OpenSSL

2004-09-04 Thread Joseph Lorenzo Hall
separate programs, not parts of a single program. In this case, if one of the programs is covered by the GPL, it has no effect on the other program. [...] -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall UC Berkeley, SIMS PhD Student http://pobox.com/~joehall/ blog: http://pobox.com/~joehall/nqb2/