Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:51:30AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > If you distribute binary images with a magazine and have something in > > that magazine saying "if you want the source write to with a > > photocopy of this specif

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Ian Jackson
Matthew Palmer writes ("Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!"): > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > If you distribute binary images with a magazine and have something in > > that magazine saying "if you want the source write to with a > > photoco

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Robinson Tryon
On 7/19/06, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 12:15:48PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:51:30AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > If you distribute binary images with

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 12:15:48PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:51:30AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > If you distribute binary images with a magazine and have something in > > > that magazine say

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit "Robinson Tryon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > My guess is that the lawyers who drafted the GPL knew or believed that > the courts would interpret such a "written offer" like a coupon: you > have to physically (or electronically, etc...) have a copy of that > particular written offer in order to

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 11:43:40PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 12:15:48PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:51:30AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > > If you distribute bin

Re: License issues with metasploit-framework

2006-07-19 Thread Francesco Poli
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:38:24 -0400 Joe Smith wrote: > > "Francesco Poli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > >> And my favourite > >> > >> # Yo yo, this be da socketNinja. > >> # Alpha-2.0 release > >> # Distribute and get a visit from tireIronNinja > >> > >>

Re: License issues with metasploit-framework

2006-07-19 Thread Francesco Poli
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:38:37 +0100 James Westby wrote: My analysis of The Metasploit Framework License v1.0 follows. Executive summary = This license is definitely non-DFSG-free and should be avoided. A work released under this license should not be distributed by Debian (not ev

Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!

2006-07-19 Thread Joe Smith
"Henning Makholm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Scripsit "Robinson Tryon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My guess is that the lawyers who drafted the GPL knew or believed that the courts would interpret such a "written offer" like a coupon: you have to physically (or elect