On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 22:11:35 +0100 Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> Actually, I didn't read it that way at all ... "if moral rights get in
> the way of this licence, then this licence takes precedence".
AFAIK, this is impossible at the moment.
Since moral rights are inalienable, it is my understandin
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francesco
Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
In the countries where moral rights apply, the Licensor
waives his right to exercise his moral right to the extent allowed by
law in order to make effective the licence of the economic rights here
above listed.
This seems
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:23:33 +0100 Rich Walker wrote:
> Ivo Danihelka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 18:35 +0200, Ales Cepek wrote:
> >> I would like to ask,
> >> if anybody here can say that the EUPL draft would be compatible
> >
OK. Problems found. Please forward these to the appropriate authority, since
I couldn't work out how to.
Distribution requirements require the provision of way too much information
about the licensor. "Geographic and electronic address"? Come on.
"Geographic address" is a matter of privac
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Florian Weimer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Copyleft clause: If the Licensee distributes and/or communicates copies
of the Original Works or Derivative Works based upon the Original Work,
this Distribution and/or Communication will be done under the terms of
this EUP
and suggestions from Czech "open source community" on EUPL draft.
There is only one month for comments so there is not much time left.
Ales Cepek
FFII.cz
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 23:32 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> So this license is certainly on the right track. But we really don't
> need yet another copyleft license which is not GPL-compatible, do we?
According the Study and Comments, they have some reasons:
Several licences, known as “Open Sourc
* Rich Walker cites the EUPL:
> Distribution and/or Communication: any act of selling, giving, lending,
> renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making
> available, on-line or off-line, copies of the Work at the disposal of
> any other physical or legal person.
New licen
> Derivative Works: the works or software that could be created by
> the Licensee, based upon the Original Work or modifications
> thereof. This Licence does not define the extent of modification
> or dependence on the Original Work required in order to classify a
> work as a Derivative Work; this
Ivo Danihelka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 18:35 +0200, Ales Cepek wrote:
>> I would like to ask,
>> if anybody here can say that the EUPL draft would be compatible with
>> the Debian Social Contract.
>
> Good question. The EUPL draft is av
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 18:35 +0200, Ales Cepek wrote:
> I would like to ask,
> if anybody here can say that the EUPL draft would be compatible with
> the Debian Social Contract.
Good question. The EUPL draft is available at
http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/2623/5585#eupl
Now i
ask,
if anybody here can say that the EUPL draft would be compatible with
the Debian Social Contract.
Ales Cepek
FFII.cz
There's a PDFs are available at
<http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/2623/5585#eupl>. Unfortunately,
DRM in the file prevents ps2ascii from working its magic:
anybody here can say that the EUPL draft would be compatible with
the Debian Social Contract.
Ales Cepek
FFII.cz
13 matches
Mail list logo
