Jakob Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doing that would be a dubious circumvention tactic in my book
> (but perhaps not in any law book, IANAL). It would be simpler,
> easier and more exact to distribute the script used for
> extraction, then anyone can reproduce the results exactly.
A key fac
The question is really quite moot. Wait until the next miscfiles
release, and then simply copy the file from there. The version in
miscfiles will be certainly free.
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
> > The next release of GNU miscfiles will have a version that is
> > really free. We're going to first transform the existing file into
> > some other useful format, which will then be licensed entir
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 03:50:22AM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> The license appears to have CHANGED since version 3.2.0, I base
> this on the note at the end saying that the unihan files contain
> different terms which are overridden by the new license. The
> large unihan files are unchanged since 3
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 07:08:35PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200211/msg00304.html
> >
> > ...in which Edmund Grimley Evans says it's free.
>
> > Edmund Grimley EvansYES
>
> Th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Ah. It would be nice to have a mail archive that doesn't chop threads
>into calendar-month blocks.
We do: search in linux.debian.legal on google groups.
--
ciao,
Marco
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200211/msg00304.html
>
> ...in which Edmund Grimley Evans says it's free.
> Edmund Grimley Evans YES
That YES should be attributed to Thomas Bushnell rather than me.
I don't think it's free, thoug
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 06:33:27PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 11:15:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I see nothing strong enough to be called "consensus" either way.
> >
> > I see no case made by anyone for the UnicodeData.txt license as (in the
> > form it was
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 11:15:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I see nothing strong enough to be called "consensus" either way.
>
> I see no case made by anyone for the UnicodeData.txt license as (in the
> form it was in at the time -- for all I know it's been changed since
> then) DFSG-free.
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 12:11:16PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I see no consensus one way or the other, but I did not see a single
> > person defend the license as DFSG-free as written.
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200211/msg00305.html
...in which Sam Hartman sa
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 11:15:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:38PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > > This license is not actually DFSG-fre
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:38PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > This license is not actually DFSG-free; it grants the right to make
> > > copies, to use copies for creating prod
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> The next release of GNU miscfiles will have a version that is
> really free. We're going to first transform the existing file into
> some other useful format, which will then be licensed entirely under
> GPL.
Nice. If you use a format which mar
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is /usr/share/perl/5.8.0/unicore/UnicodeData.txt a copy of the file, or
> an "extracted" form of it? As I read the license, the file is only
> freely redistributable *after* you've modified it -- unless the file is
> not actually copyrightable and the
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:54:47AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:38PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > This license is not actually DFSG-free; i
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:38PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > This license is not actually DFSG-free; it grants the right to make
> > > copies, to use copies for creating prod
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:38PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Is /usr/share/perl/5.8.0/unicore/UnicodeData.txt a copy of the file, or
> an "extracted" form of it? As I read the license, the file is only
> freely redistributable *after* you've modified it -- unless the file is
> not actually co
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This license is not actually DFSG-free; it grants the right to make
> > copies, to use copies for creating products, and to distribute copies
> > *internally*, but it does not grant the
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This license is not actually DFSG-free; it grants the right to make
> copies, to use copies for creating products, and to distribute copies
> *internally*, but it does not grant the right to distribute copies
> publically or to modify the file.
The per
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 07:57:45PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> First of all, let's suppose that the license is DFSG free. It's:
> | UCD Terms of Use
> |
> | Disclaimer
> |
> | The Unicode Character Database is provided as is by Unicode,
> | Inc. No cl
First of all, let's suppose that the license is DFSG free. It's:
| UCD Terms of Use
|
| Disclaimer
|
| The Unicode Character Database is provided as is by Unicode,
| Inc. No claims are made as to fitness for any particular
| purpose. No warranties of any kind are ex
21 matches
Mail list logo
