On 3/19/06, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Not just linking; it's the creation of a derivative work of a GPLed
> work. Frankly, I don't see how you can argue that cdrecord is not a
> derivative work of the GPLed part of cdrecord and the build system.
Yeah, and your car is a deriv
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>If courts were to go for the first interpretation, my opinion is that
>french Debian (and other distributions) mirrors could be endangered.
This is a problem for French mirror operators, not for Debian.
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:35:16PM +0100, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >If courts were to go for the first interpretation, my opinion is that
> >french Debian (and other distributions) mirrors could be endangered.
> This is a problem for French mirror ope
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> A work can't be derived from another work without including some
>> piece of it
>
> This is actually not the case; including output of a work (or
> generated by a work) in another work can make that work a der
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> While discussions here on the GPLv3 are quite appropriate, concerns
> about the actual draft should be voiced using gplv3.fsf.org and the
> web forms contained therein.
I have reported several defects to the FSF webmasters, but they have
gone silent recently. Ha
"John Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On controlling music, I personally see no issues with this. With out DRM,
> music or other media type content could not be legally made available over
> the Internet.
Sorry, someone has lied to you. Music and other content is regularly made
available over the
#include
* Måns Rullgård [Sun, Mar 19 2006, 01:50:24AM]:
> Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> These are the bits I'm referring to, from cdrecorc.c (sorry for the
> long lines, but that's how it's written):
>
> ---BEGIN QUOTE---
> /*
>* Begin restricted code for quality assura
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 01:53:17PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Maybe in the US. Private copies in England have more limited scope and we
> > seem to have limited or no right to make backups. This does comply with
> > both letter and spirit of the Berne Union, as far
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> #include
> * Måns Rullgård [Sun, Mar 19 2006, 01:50:24AM]:
>> Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> These are the bits I'm referring to, from cdrecorc.c (sorry for the
>> long lines, but that's how it's written):
>>
>> ---BEGIN QUOTE---
>> /*
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:35:16PM +0100, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >If courts were to go for the first interpretation, my opinion is that
>> >french Debian (and other distributions) mirrors could be enda
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 12:35:16 +0100 (CET)
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >If courts were to go for the first interpretation, my opinion is that
> >french Debian (and other distributions) mirrors could be endangered.
>
> This is a problem for French mirror op
* Mns Rullgrd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060319 01:14]:
> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Not just linking; it's the creation of a derivative work of a GPLed
> > work. Frankly, I don't see how you can argue that cdrecord is not a
> > derivative work of the GPLed part of cdrecord and the bui
"Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Mns Rullgrd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060319 01:14]:
>> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Not just linking; it's the creation of a derivative work of a GPLed
>> > work. Frankly, I don't see how you can argue that cdrecord is not a
>> > der
Good News!
Interested to obtain Bachelors', Masters', MBA's, Doctorate & Ph.D. degrees
available in your field in 2 weeks time?
It's available now...
Call Us and get yours today
1-484-693-8861
Our Education office has someone available 24 hours a day, 7 Days a week
Why waiting?
1-484-693-8861
Simon Vallet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 1=B0 To willingly edit, distribute to the public, or inform the public
> about, in any form, a device[2] whose obvious purpose is to permit
> unauthorized distribution of protected works
Can someone tell me what 'obvious purpose' means here? Need it be intended
f
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Better yet, why don't we recognize that the phrase "technical measures"
> has a very specific meaning when we're talking about copyright
> protection?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act
You're citing both wikipedia and USA law? That se
Eduard Bloch wrote:
---BEGIN QUOTE---
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
announcement including an appropriate copyright notice
Måns Rullgård wrote:
Incidentally, this is what the dvdrtools folks have already done.
Ummm, come to think of it, why is dvdrtools in non-free while cdrecord
is in main?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a new email address!You can now email me at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Hello,As you read this, I don't want you to feel sorry forme,because, I believe everyone will die someday. My name isAbdul-Wahab Omar. I a merchant of Omani nationality and i have been diagnosed with Esophagealcancer. It has defil
#include
* Anthony DeRobertis [Sun, Mar 19 2006, 11:42:58AM]:
> Måns Rullgård wrote:
> >Incidentally, this is what the dvdrtools folks have already done.
> >
> >
> Ummm, come to think of it, why is dvdrtools in non-free while cdrecord
> is in main?
I am waiting for the answer of its maintainer
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:39:12PM +, Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:35:16PM +0100, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> >If courts were to go for the first in
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 03:22:56PM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Vallet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 1=B0 To willingly edit, distribute to the public, or inform the public
> > about, in any form, a device[2] whose obvious purpose is to permit
> > unauthorized distribution of protected
"Raul Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it's someone else's GPL'd C code, then in your hypothetical example,
> he's supposed provide source to his students should they ask for it.
That is my point. The Word document is the source. That is the
format that he makes modifications in. This is
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:39:12PM +, Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:35:16PM +0100, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
Le 18 mars 06 à 15:20, Damyan Ivanov a écrit :
[META: This is a cross-post to ibpp-discuss and debian-legal. I'd like
to give direct discussion a chance, since I am rather busy and can't
mediate in a timely fashion]
Olivier, below is another comment about the new license.
When answe
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > While discussions here on the GPLv3 are quite appropriate,
> > concerns about the actual draft should be voiced using
> > gplv3.fsf.org and the web forms contained therein.
>
> I have reported several defects to the FSF web
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 13:12:25 + Måns Rullgård wrote:
>
> > And since it does print such an announcement by default then it
> > should be kept. However, I disagree on the level appropriateness -
> > stuff like "This is a broken Linux system" does not belong to the
> > disclaimer/copyright categ
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 22:05:53 + Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hello debian-legal experts ;-),
> >
> > I need a bit support to clarify the issue with cdrtools' build
> > system.
> >
> > Summary: a while ago, Joerg Schilling (upstream) replaced the
> > cop
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:36:14AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Adam McKenna wrote:
> >But you can only use one copy at a time. You could make a good argument
> >that
> >the copies not in use are backup copies. (Remember, we're talking about
> >documents here.)
> >
> Well, US copyright l
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:25:59PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 01:53:17PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Maybe in the US. Private copies in England have more limited scope and we
> > > seem to have limited or no right to make backups. This does co
Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 22:05:53 + Måns Rullgård wrote:
>
>> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Hello debian-legal experts ;-),
>> >
>> > I need a bit support to clarify the issue with cdrtools' build
>> > system.
>> >
>> > Summary: a whi
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:36:14AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
>> Adam McKenna wrote:
>> >But you can only use one copy at a time. You could make a good
>> >argument that the copies not in use are backup copies. (Remember,
>> >we're talking about d
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I have reported several defects to the FSF webmasters, but they have
> > gone silent recently. Have you heard anything about making the
> > comments system any-browser-compatible and generally accessible to
> > all?
>
> Yes
Olivier Mascia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Most of the two above should be in README and AUTHORS, in my opinion.
>
> There is no such files with IBPP. Much easier to have everything in a
> single place.
I disagree. The description of the software and the authors will chan
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 03:22:56PM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Simon Vallet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 1=B0 To willingly edit, distribute to the public, or inform the public
> > > about, in any form, a device[2] whose obvious purpose is to permit
>
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 01:25:59PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Still, the person making the private copy is not distributing to anyone.
> > > So
> > > as long as he doesn't employ a technological measure to prevent *himself*
>
"MJ Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
The MIT License (in case there would be multiple versions, I'm =20
referring to this one: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-=20
license.html) is indeed very close to the wishes of the IBPP authors.
=20=
I thin
"MJ Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think that's the one. There are several often called MIT. Someone
has moved the copy on X.org to which
http://www.fr.debian.org/legal/licenses/ links - has anyone
a new URL besides the failed open source initiative, please
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:50:54AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > What's the difference?
>
> One has 'or' and the other has 'and'.
> Your lack of attention to detail is troubling.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious with an obtuse, glib comment. I can see
you're inte
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:10:37AM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 03:22:56PM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Simon Vallet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 1=B0 To willingly edit, distribute to the public, or inform th
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 07:51:05AM +0100, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:10:37AM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 03:22:56PM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Simon V
41 matches
Mail list logo
