Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-10-17 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Ryan Finnie wrote: > Walter, > > Thank you for your comments (everybody else too). Sorry for not > following up sooner; please see question below. > > On 9/27/06, Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for help wi

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-10-17 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Ryan Finnie wrote: > Greetings, > > I responded to an RFP[0] for packaging magic-smtpd[1], and need some > help on the legal side. I see 3 issues here: > > 1. The license[2], also included below, has not been reviewed by the > OSI, and is not used in any existing Debian package. The company >

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-10-16 Thread Don Armstrong
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Ryan Finnie wrote: > On 9/27/06, Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This looks like forced *public* availability and a 12-month > >> retainer, which I think is both a significant cost (so not free > >> redistribution) and maybe a

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-10-16 Thread luna
Hello, On Monday 16 October 2006, à 00:53:36, Ryan Finnie wrote: > On 9/27/06, Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for help with: > >> > (c) You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications > >> > publ

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-10-16 Thread Ryan Finnie
Walter, Thank you for your comments (everybody else too). Sorry for not following up sooner; please see question below. On 9/27/06, Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for help with: > > (c) You must make Source Cod

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-09-27 Thread Walter Landry
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for help with: > > (c) You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications > > publicly available under the terms of this License, including the > > license grants set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Dep

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-09-27 Thread MJ Ray
Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for help with: > 1. The license[2], also included below, has not been reviewed by the > OSI, and is not used in any existing Debian package. The company > itself considers it "open source", but I feel I am not qualified to > make a determination. I will comme

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-09-26 Thread Ben Finney
"Ryan Finnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2. The software is designed to replace certain components of qmail, > which is wholly non-free. Can it perform its function in the absence of qmail? Perhaps in the presence of another MTA which is free? > Even if the license is clean, does this make th

Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-09-26 Thread Roberto C. Sanchez
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 10:04:28PM -0700, Ryan Finnie wrote: > Greetings, > > I responded to an RFP[0] for packaging magic-smtpd[1], and need some > help on the legal side. I see 3 issues here: > > 1. The license[2], also included below, has not been reviewed by the > OSI, and is not used in any

License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL

2006-09-26 Thread Ryan Finnie
Greetings, I responded to an RFP[0] for packaging magic-smtpd[1], and need some help on the legal side. I see 3 issues here: 1. The license[2], also included below, has not been reviewed by the OSI, and is not used in any existing Debian package. The company itself considers it "open source",