Sean Kellogg wrote:
On Wednesday 24 August 2005 01:38 am, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
I fail to understand why the licence under which the PHP programming
language resorts, can govern software under the GPL, since the PHP licence
only mentions derivative works, not applications written in that
pr
Marco d'Itri wrote:
This might fail the Dissident test (and thus discriminate against
Which is not part of the DFSG, so it does not matter.
The Dissident test is a test for DFSG #5, so it does matter. See:
http://wiki.debian.net/?DissidentTest
http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.ht
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If someone claims that he has placed his software into public domain,
> and the person is subject to the jurisdiction of one of the droit
> d'auteur countries (Germany for example[1]), shall we interpret this
> claim as null and void, or as the grant of
Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Many people can not legally use the patented techniques.
> By making it easier to use the formats which require patented
> implementation (for both those who can use it legally, and for those
> who wish to ignore the law) creates an environment where u
Jakub Nadolny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't know what the last phrase is meant to mean "publishers ask
> > only for information about it".
>
> It means that if you copy or cite this publication, they ask you to send
> them information about it.
> I think that could be the problem, isn't i
5 matches
Mail list logo
