In addition to the issues raised by others, I'd like to point out the
following:
> Public/publicly: Not solely directed towards a
> certain group of people who have a personal
> connection to each other or are associated
> through their affiliation with a legal person or
> public organisation.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:55:48 + Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> In September, I was approached by an important research institute in
> Germany about a new software license, d-fsl. They are interested in
> making sure that the license conforms with both the Open Source
> Defin
MJ Ray wrote:
> > Section 5 Conclusion of the Contract
>
> Ow, this licence wants to be a contract. Never a happy sign.
It's next to impossible under German law to have any kind of
license that _isn't_ a contract. In Germany, if you make an
offer and someone accepts it, you have a contract. No
co
We've seen worse. But this license sucks. Don't use it until it's been
fixed.
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:55:48PM +, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> Entitled Person(s): The author(s) or other
> holders of the exclusive right to use for the
> Program.
That's not even gramma
> In September, I was approached by an important research institute in
> Germany about a new software license, d-fsl. [...]
What "special requirements of German and European law" motivate this
licence? Previously some EU-funded groups have used minimal edits to
the customary free software licences
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-14
20:55]:
> Definition as well as the DFSG and have asked for out input. When we
> originally started the discussion, the license had not been published
> so I asked Don Armstrong and Matthew Garrett privately to comment on
6 matches
Mail list logo
