On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 09:20:11AM +0200, Luca Deri wrote:
> Jordan
> I have done the requested changes. I didn't know of GnuTSL, so I might
> consider using it in future releases.
>
> Please let me know if everything is ok now.
>
> Thanks a lot for all you're d
Hope to have answered to your question. I am sorry but I did not succeedin asking Berkeley's Regents for a license change.
Didn't they issue a blanket license change for _all_ code owned by them under the old bsd license?
On 5/22/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
The questions asked weren't "Is this okay for non-free?" it's "Did you
mean or when you wrote ?". The answers to those latter
questions are, ttbomk, all included in the FAQ, which is why ignoring
it just wastes everyone's time.
If the FAQ weren't
On 6/1/06, Joe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Andrew Donnellan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 6/1/06, Karl O. Pinc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The GPL is not "completely unmodifiable", you just have limitations
>> on how you may modify it and still use i
On Apr 8, 2005 2:44 AM, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 11:50:54AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > Wrong! It is perfectly legal in the United States, and I'm pretty
> > sure in your country, to distribute or redistribute copyrighted
> > works. Otherwise there
ntion
of a trademark.
Again, I am not a legal person but felt this was worth bringing up.
I am CC'ing debian-legal to hear their thoughts.
Regards,
- --
Jordan Metzmeier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJMYYLjAAoJEKj/C3qNthmTWvEQAJgH
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Sorry, I left out the footnote on my last email. The link to the
document covering usage of the Ubuntu trademark is here:
http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
- --
Jordan Metzmeier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9
7 matches
Mail list logo
