On 12/18/09, Ben Finney wrote:
> Andrew Donnellan writes:
>
>> On 12/18/09, Ben Finney wrote:
>> > I'm doubtful that it's correct to say “If it's copyright, it has an
>> > owner”. Copyright is *not* a property right; it's a different
>> > monopoly right. Monopolies are held; that doesn't make th
Andrew Donnellan writes:
> On 12/18/09, Ben Finney wrote:
> > I'm doubtful that it's correct to say “If it's copyright, it has an
> > owner”. Copyright is *not* a property right; it's a different
> > monopoly right. Monopolies are held; that doesn't make the holder of
> > a monopoly the “owner”
On 12/18/09, Ben Finney wrote:
> I'm doubtful that it's correct to say “If it's copyright, it has an
> owner”. Copyright is *not* a property right; it's a different monopoly
> right. Monopolies are held; that doesn't make the holder of a monopoly
> the “owner” in a property sense.
>
> IANAL, but i
Francesco Poli writes:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:00:48 + Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
>
> > If it's copyright, it's proprietary.
> >
> > "proprietary" == "property". If it's copyright, it has an owner,
> > therefore it's property, therefore it's proprietary.
>
> Your reasoning does not seem in
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:00:48 + Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> In message <20091216233823.af491478@firenze.linux.it>, Francesco
> Poli writes
> >> The second question may seem strange, but why copyleft license is
> >> used?
> >
> >Hopefully in order to prevent the distribution of proprietar
On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:00 AM, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> CLOSED derivative works.
>
> If it's copyright, it's proprietary.
>
> "proprietary" == "property". If it's copyright, it has an owner, therefore
> it's property, therefore it's proprietary.
Although the GNU project disagrees again with y
In message <20091216233823.af491478@firenze.linux.it>, Francesco
Poli writes
The second question may seem strange, but why copyleft license is
used?
Hopefully in order to prevent the distribution of proprietary
derivative works...
CLOSED derivative works.
If it's copyright, it's proprie
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:20:45 +0200 anatoly techtonik wrote:
> Hello,
Hello...
>
> Following recent Python policy updates I wonder if GPL is really the
> license of choice for software documentation in Debian?
IMHO, yes it is and it should be, really!
The GPL is the best choice, whenever a copy
license is used?
Does it allow to cite Debian Policy in books without making those
books freely available?
Please, CC.
Original thread:
http://old.nabble.com/Final-updates-for-this-Python-Policy-revision-to26754791.html
--
anatoly t.
-- Forwarded message --
From: anatoly techtonik
9 matches
Mail list logo
