[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Hope to have answered to your question. I am sorry but I did not succeed
>> in asking Berkeley's Regents for a license change.
>Didn't they issue a blanket license change for _all_ code owned by them
>under the old bsd license?
Yes.
But the original spice code was not
Hope to have answered to your question. I am sorry but I did not succeedin asking Berkeley's Regents for a license change.
Didn't they issue a blanket license change for _all_ code owned by them under the old bsd license?
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 02:26:16AM +0300, Gerasimos Melissaratos wrote:
> Below I include the answer I got from Mr Nenzi about the ngspice licencing.
> In short, I asked him about the possibility of a re-release of ngspice with
> the new BSD license or something else compatible with Debian. The sho
Below I include the answer I got from Mr Nenzi about the ngspice licencing. In
short, I asked him about the possibility of a re-release of ngspice with the new
BSD license or something else compatible with Debian. The short answer is no.
In the face of that, would it be possible to include a packa
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 21:46 -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> On Saturday 23 July 2005 08:04 pm, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 17:11 -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > > This is a difficult situation that is worth commentary. Assume for a
> > > moment that the U.S. has some strict export re
> On Saturday 23 July 2005 04:41 pm, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:03:56 -0700 Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > > Anyone else have thoughts?
> >
> > Yes, I have one:
> > |3. The licensee agrees to obey all U.S. Government res- trictions
> > |governing redistribution or export of t
On Saturday 23 July 2005 08:04 pm, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 17:11 -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > This is a difficult situation that is worth commentary. Assume for a
> > moment that the U.S. has some strict export restriction. As a U.S.
> > citizen I am bound by those laws and
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 17:11 -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> This is a difficult situation that is worth commentary. Assume for a moment
> that the U.S. has some strict export restriction. As a U.S. citizen I am
> bound by those laws and cannot legally violate them. Further, if I am to
> distribu
On Saturday 23 July 2005 04:41 pm, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:03:56 -0700 Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > Anyone else have thoughts?
>
> Yes, I have one:
> |3. The licensee agrees to obey all U.S. Government res- trictions
> |governing redistribution or export of the software an
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:03:56 -0700 Sean Kellogg wrote:
> Anyone else have thoughts?
Yes, I have one:
|3. The licensee agrees to obey all U.S. Government res- trictions
|governing redistribution or export of the software and
|documentation.
That sounds non-free.
Suppose I'm *not* a U
* Anthony W. Youngman:
> Actually, doesn't the GPL itself contain exactly the same restriction,
> just worded a bit differently?
>
> The GPL forbids charging for the code itself.
Only for the source code which you must make available when you
distribute binaries, you may not charge for anything
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sean Kellogg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
On Friday 22 July 2005 03:28 am, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Sean Kellogg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> License 1 contains a limitation on use ("educational, research and
> non-profit purposes, without fee") which is a violation o
On Friday 22 July 2005 03:28 am, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Sean Kellogg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > License 1 contains a limitation on use ("educational, research and
> > non-profit purposes, without fee") which is a violation of DFSG #6.
> > License 2 is less obvious, but I personally believe t
Sean Kellogg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> License 1 contains a limitation on use ("educational, research and non-profit
> purposes, without fee") which is a violation of DFSG #6. License 2 is less
> obvious, but I personally believe that a provision that forbids charging a
> fee for distributi
On Thursday 21 July 2005 04:49 pm, Gerasimos Melissaratos wrote:
> X-Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> X-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I'd like to create a package for ng-spice, which seems to be governed by
> two licenses, which I include herein. In fir
15 matches
Mail list logo
