On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Rick Younie wrote:
>You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Geocrawler.com, VA
>Linux Systems, and all related services from any and all liability,
>penalties, losses, damages, costs, expenses, attorneys' fees, causes
>of action or claims caused by o
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 22-Mar-00, 18:08 (CST), Eric Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thus there could exist a pseudo-secret distro, given only to one's
> > friends or sold to select customers, that the author never finds out
> > about, simply through its obscurity
On 4 Dec 1999, Amy Fong wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Zygo Blaxell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Corel has approximately 400 mailing lists subscribed to an internal
> >news/mail gateway that I wrote (the NNTP server is 'sn' by Harold Sn,
> >somewhere in Singapore IIRC, the SMTP se
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 02:00:25PM +0200, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
> > Please have a look at http://www.vmware.com/ and help me
> > decide if we can distribute VMware in non-free, or only as an
> > installer package. I currently think w
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
> Brian Ristuccia wrote:
>
> > 5. The documentation is completely and totally non-free
>
> Nod. Do you think removing the documentation from the package constitutes
> modifying it, and would violate the license?
Removing the documentation would violate this:
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> I figured we could occasionally use a little laugh on this list, so have a
> look at the following two URL's:
>
> http://technet.oracle.com/tech/linux/ - Oracle's download page. Check out
> the license textarea -- you can put any license you want in t
On 15 Jul 1999, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Remco Blaakmeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think that "permission to (...) for any purpose and without fee is
> > hereby granted" is very different from "permission to (...) is hereby
> > grante
On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> The license for gif2png looks pretty free to me. According to the Free
> Software Foundation, programs that decompress gif files are non governed by
> the IBM and UNISYS patyents. Are there other issues with gif2png that I'm
> overlooking?
>
> http://
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> I can understand what you say.
>
> - But as you can see, the copyright only shows the fundamental and
> rough intention of the author. It does not show strict conditions
> on every situations like GPL. The programmer is not lawyer in general.
It d
On 31 May 1999, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Remco Blaakmeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>On Mon, 31 May 1999, Kenshi Muto wrote:
>
>> License: == from README ==
>>
>> Author: Kazuhiko Shutoh
>>
>> Permission to
On Mon, 31 May 1999, Kenshi Muto wrote:
> License: == from README ==
>
> Author: Kazuhiko Shutoh
>
> Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute without charge this
> software, documentation, images, etc. is granted, provided that this
> comment and the author
On 3 Mar 1999, John Hasler wrote:
> Santiago Vila writes:
> > But this is not all, the UW does not want "modified binaries" to be
> > distributed, and as a result of this, no binary .deb packages may be
> > distributed by FTP.
>
> Unless permission has been granted by UW. Paul has that permissio
12 matches
Mail list logo
