As many people have pointed out, I realize I should be saying
"proprietary" when I used the word "commercial". I also realize that the
GPL does not preclude "commercial" == "for profit" usage. I was merely
echoing the terminology used by Trolltech. I do not condone it however.
Thanks as always
Hi,
I want to package some games who happen to be remakes of older 8-bit games:
http://www.masoftware.es/
I've already talked to upstream and they're licensing them under GPL, so no
problem about the license. There are also other programs and games in the
repository which are more or less vers
On Mon, 14 May 2007 18:56:26 -0500 Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 14/05/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:53:11 -0500 Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/05/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > P.S.: I recommend you against th
On Tue May 15 17:25, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
> But one question:
>
> Do those license terms allow the songs to be distributed in a separate
> Debian package from the primary "fretsonfire" package?
No, it will have to be amended to allow this as was suggested elsewhere
in this thread.
> What if t
2007/4/27, Jason Spiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2007/4/27, Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] How about using:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/legalcode with 4. d.
> added saying:
>
> You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
> publicl
On Mon, 14 May 2007 17:18:22 +0200 Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 10:14:35AM +, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Hi Maintainer,
> >
> > i dont think the EPSG tables license is free, so the dataset cant go
> > into Debian main. Its a "dont modify, non-commercial only" license
On Tue, 15 May 2007 19:44:41 +0200 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to package some games who happen to be remakes of older 8-bit
> games:
>
> http://www.masoftware.es/
>
> I've already talked to upstream and they're licensing them under GPL,
> so no problem about the license.
Well, it must
On 15/05/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2007 18:56:26 -0500 Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 14/05/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:53:11 -0500 Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/05/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PR
Shriramana Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As many people have pointed out, I realize I should be saying
> "proprietary" when I used the word "commercial". I also realize that
> the GPL does not preclude "commercial" == "for profit" usage. I was
> merely echoing the terminology used by Trollt
On Tuesday 15 May 2007 16:07:04 Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 19:44:41 +0200 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> > I've already talked to upstream and they're licensing them under GPL,
> > so no problem about the license.
>
> Well, it must be seen *if* upstream actually have the right to license
> t
10 matches
Mail list logo
