Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still confused by how Intel's permission - however limited - might
> prevent Debian from doing something that Debian would be happy to do
> if no permission were given.
>
> Usually Debian ignores patents unless there is a threat of legal
> acti
> "Walter" == Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Walter> Sunnanvind Fenderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Walter Landry wrote:
>>
>> > This rather long paragraph means that I can't take out some code
>> > covered by patents and use it to extend my favorite
Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Intel is granting specific rights which do not extend to all GPL
> software. Therefore, clause 7 of the GPL comes into effect, and we
> can't distribute GPL'd works which include this Intel code. Clause 7
> is actually quite clear about this.
I'm not totally
#include
Walter Landry wrote on Wed Feb 06, 2002 um 12:17:59PM:
> > > This rather long paragraph means that I can't take out some code
> > > covered by patents and use it to extend my favorite text editor.
> > > That would count as an additional restriction, and thus
> > > GPL-incompatible.
Okay
Sunnanvind Fenderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Walter Landry wrote:
>
> > This rather long paragraph means that I can't take out some code
> > covered by patents and use it to extend my favorite text editor.
> > That would count as an additional restriction, and thus
> > GPL-incompatible.
>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 07:22:00AM +0100, Sunnanvind Fenderson wrote:
> I agree, that would be better. This is a lot more restrictive. I'm
> still not sure that it's GPL-incompatible or DFSG-nonfree, though. It
> *is* an added permission rather than added restrictions, right?
> What does the GNU fo
Walter Landry wrote:
> This rather long paragraph means that I can't take out some code
> covered by patents and use it to extend my favorite text editor.
> That would count as an additional restriction, and thus
> GPL-incompatible.
Well... Patents normally mean "Hey, hands off this". This pate
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Intel hereby grants Recipient and Licensees a non-exclusive,
> worldwide, royalty- free patent license under Licensed Patents to
> make, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer the
> Software, if any, in source code and object code form. Th
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> and kernel-patch-ethernet-drivers package. But the license is a bit
> vague (see attachment). If I interpret all this lawyer-language
> correctly, following things are problematic:
It looks like Intel is genuinely trying to do the right thing here. They
9 matches
Mail list logo
