Re: Request for suggestions of DFSG-free documentation licences

2007-05-28 Thread Adam Borowski
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 10:15:06AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > The document author, by placing only *some* parts of the work under > the GPL, is essentially determining for the recipient what parts they > will find useful to combine with other parts of the software. Prose > descriptive parts could b

Re: (C) vs ©

2007-05-28 Thread Shriramana Sharma
Thanks to all who replied. Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: Further, whether (C) or ©, isn't it superfluous to use it after the word "copyright" which itself means the same thing? Yes. So I can simply avoid using either (C) or © and thus avoid this whole problem? So if the following: --

Re: help with crafting proper license header for a dual-licensing project

2007-05-28 Thread Shriramana Sharma
Hello people. One question about the header I recently sent for final approval -- The project developers want to distribute a single set of source files under both the licenses. They don't want to have to maintain two different directories with two different versions of the same files with me

Re: (C) vs ©

2007-05-28 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 12:38:28PM +0530, Shriramana Sharma wrote: > So I can simply avoid using either (C) or © and thus avoid this whole > problem? Sorry, I misread your question originally. You can drop the word Copyright, but you cannot drop the copyright symbol, if you care about UCC compli

Re: help with crafting proper license header for a dual-licensing project

2007-05-28 Thread Francesco Poli
On Sun, 27 May 2007 14:24:21 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote: > On Sun, 27 May 2007, Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:43:41 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote: > > > On Sun, 27 May 2007, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] > > If you consult a dictionary you won't find any reference to the FSD > > or to

Re: help with crafting proper license header for a dual-licensing project

2007-05-28 Thread Anthony W. Youngman
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes I still cannot see why "proprietary" should mean "with secret source code": its basic common meaning is "owned by a proprietor" and does not refer to closeness or secrecy. Your own words condemn you :-) This is an accura

Re: help with crafting proper license header for a dual-licensing project

2007-05-28 Thread Francesco Poli
On Mon, 28 May 2007 23:01:53 +0200 Francesco Poli wrote: [a message with a BAD signature] For those who verified the GPG signature of my previous message and found a BAD one: I apologize, I was again fooled by bug #302264... -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.ht