whilst most European countries
can almost afford to do so.
I am not a lawyer.
This is not legal advice.
jonathon
nses are either legal boiler-plate, or terms of art, and hence
lack the creativity required to qualify for copyright protection.
jonathon
rom the realm of "Public Domain"?
If so, then you have demonstrated precisely why the content in
question can not be included in either Debian Free, or in Debian Non-Free.
I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
jonathon
Ephemeris,
that is congruent with the Debian Social Contract.
I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
jonathon
On 03/01/2018 10:34 AM, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Source code is an entity, but observation is an activity, so it cannot be
> source code.
technically, how the observation is recorded is the source code. But
without that observation, there is no source code.
jonathon
ata is fundamentally different from software: for example, there is no
> "source code" for DE405.
The source code for the ephemeris is physical observations of the stars,
planets, and other bodies in it.
jonathon
On 02/28/2018 11:42 AM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>>> Where can I find the text of the NOSA v2.0 ?
>> but the attachment containing the text was scrubbed.
> Here it is:
Thanks.
jonathon
bed.
NASA Open Source Agreement 2.0
I can find copies of NOSA 1.3. (In theory NOSA 1.3 is neither Free (FSF)
nor Open (OSI), but the latter, for some bizarre reason, lists it as open.)
jonathon
ression was that NASA,
along with sub-contractors, and organisations they work with, were going
to do a wholesale license migration, from the hodgepodge they currently
utilise, to NOSO 2.0, unless otherwise prohibited by law, from so doing.
jonathon
On 02/25/2018 09:48 PM, Roberto wrote:
> In Spain, ... the "public domain" concept doesn't even exist
Spain is not the only country to have no concept of "public domain".
Which is precisely why one needs to how the JPL Planetary Ephemeris is
licensed.
jonathon
rces will
> be available to the public for free.
Discrimination against fields of endeavour.
> 5. When applying changes to the source code you need to leave your name,
> your email address and the date of your modifications so that other
> people may contact you.
Fails the De
w hard would it be to have
it added to the debian approved free license list?
with thanks
jonathon
hi ian,
On 30/09/2015 2:58 pm, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jonathon Love writes ("r-cran-afex package, violates the GPL?"):
>> i've just packaged and submitted the r-cran-afex package, and it has
>> been accepted
>>
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.
an-afex and its dependencies are R packages, which run under the R
interpreter.
r-cran-afex calls functions provided by its dependencies.
does this constitute a violation of the GPL2?
with thanks
jonathon
--
JASP - A Fresh Way to Do Statistics
http://jasp-stats.org/
--
How happy is he born and taugh
or certification."
jonathon
--
eMail with a precedence of other than "bulk", "list", or "junk" is
forwarded to Dve Null, unread.
eMail with those precedences might, but probably will not be read.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.or
I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
jonathon
* Unknown - detected
* English
* English
Unable to detect language of selected text.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
i
pe that
Did you really mean clause #4, or was it a typo for clause # 5?
The rest of your response implies that the 4 was a typo.
Clause 4 probably is legally required, but is it still within the scope
of Libre software?
jonathon
- --
All emails sent to this with email address with a precedence oth
was _All Rights Reserved_.
jonathon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d365b46.9040...@gmail.com
he ability to add that metadata.
xan
jonathon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
s a discussion of what is needed to meet DFSG guidelines, and
how the three existing tests (Desert island, political
dissident,malevolent corporation) can be passed by work that fails
freedom 0, 1, 2, or 3. The anti-TPM clause in the CC licenses
theoretically prevent that situation from happening.)
20 matches
Mail list logo
