O wise ones,
Please point out to me where in the forest of the GPL 3 liveth that
animal called the "requirement of derivative works to be distributed
under the same license"?
GPL v3 does not at all have the word "derivative". Apparently this is an
attempt at making the GPL less dependent on
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> GPL v3 does not at all have the word "derivative". Apparently this is an
> attempt at making the GPL less dependent on the US legal system, which
> is a good thing ok but I can hardly read this text.
You have to put several pieces together.
First, definition:
To "mod
I very much enjoyed the way you put your question.
Although not a wise one, here is a shot:
In the definitions it reads "to "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all
or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy."
So, whatever is not
On Monday 05 November 2007 05:51:20 Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> Please point out to me where in the forest of the GPL 3 liveth that
> animal called the "requirement of derivative works to be distributed
> under the same license"?
Is there some specific thing you think the GPLv3 allows that most peo
I talked to someone on IRC and looks like the only license issue concerns
mkisofs. This links to both GPL and CDDL code and this is illegal.
In particular, I just got an email from the author of cdparanoia that he has
already given permission to the author of cdrtools to use the cdparanoia code
Hi,
I didn't know where to start so figured would start
from here. I was wondering what the US laws where in
shipping pre-installed debian servers to offices of
the same company outside US, to Europe mainly.
I intend to use ssh, kerberos packages. I would
appreciate some information and pointers
6 matches
Mail list logo
