Hello,
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 08:22:05AM +0900, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
> 2. Apple Public Source License
>A number of drivers are adapted from Darwin and were released under
>the Apple Public Source License (APSL). More specifically, version
>1.2 applies, which to my knowledge was c
> Scripsit Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Previously Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> > > I think this is non-free. It means that people without net access
> > > cannot receive the software on disks from a friend and later give
> > > the friend back a bugfixed version.
>
> > Does it say `imme
Scripsit Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Previously Henning Makholm wrote:
> > I think this is non-free. It means that people without net access
> > cannot receive the software on disks from a friend and later give
> > the friend back a bugfixed version.
> Does it say `immediately' or `ele
Previously Henning Makholm wrote:
> I think this is non-free. It means that people without net access
> cannot receive the software on disks from a friend and later give
> the friend back a bugfixed version.
Does it say `immediately' or `electronically' ?
Wichert.
--
_
Scripsit Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The requirement that all modifications must be made publicly available
> is a bit annoying. If I give a modification to a friend, I am
> required to publish the modification to the world for the next 12
> months. It's probably ok, although I'm willing
> Hello,
> Is this license DFSG-free?
> I searched the archiv but only found the same question from
> January 2001 with an answer
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/debian-legal-200101/msg9.html)
> and a thread "xodometer licensing" where it is discussed but didn't
> see the answer.:
On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I don't think so: it would still collide with the "no discrimination
> > against fields of endaveour" part of DFSG.
> Filing lawsuits to disrupt or otherwise harm free software is a field of
> endeavor?
The clause does not restrict iteself to cases w
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 04:00:24PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> [the licence terminates]
> >(c) automatically without notice from Apple if You, at any time
> >during the term of this License, commence an action for patent
> >infringement against Apple.
>
> and co
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> quotes
[the licence terminates]
>(c) automatically without notice from Apple if You, at any time
>during the term of this License, commence an action for patent
>infringement against Apple.
and comments
> This last clause would be o
J.H.M. Dassen writes:
> http://www.publicsource.apple.com/apsl.html
This postcardware clause is non-free:
(c) must notify Apple and other third parties of how to obtain Your
Deployed Modifications by filling out and submitting the
required information found at
"J.H.M. Dassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
http://www.publicsource.apple.com/apsl.html
Apple is claiming that this is an Open Source license. However, it is
not:
1. It has a termination clause similar to the IBM Secure Mailer
license. (I'm not sure that this is actually an Open
11 matches
Mail list logo
