(followups to -legal, please)
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
Excerpting is allowed by copyright law under the fair use principle, and
one need not accept any license governing a work to exercise that right
to fair use.
Australia, for example, doesn't have a
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:24:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Steve == Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve As a developer, I am by no means in a position to try to
Steve interpret what the phrasers of the Social Contract /really/
Steve meant to say. They wrote what they
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
the book's content, but has every reason
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Richard Braakman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The freedom of expression of the author is what is being
protected by this clause. The freedom to express opinion without having
those statements twisted into something completely
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 03:52:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
the book's content,
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 02:57:32PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 14:39, Steve Langasek wrote:
I'd be happy to hear clarifications from the author and contemporaries,
then; to be honest, my memory of Debian history isn't good enough to
even know who to approach. (The
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 03:52:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
While I'm not sure that M. Mouse should be owned by anyone but Uncle Walt,
I understand the fear of the current copyright holder, given that I am in
direct contact with the spirit of the original Mr. Disney. He has some
very clear
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 03:52:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
Just look at the new and interesting stories being told by Hollywood about
everyone from Mr. I. Crane, to Peter Pan. All possible by the expiration
of those copyrights on the original books.
As a point of fact, Peter Pan is still
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:34:57AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
Not necessarily. Imagine part of the README for licquix, the hot new
free kernel that everyone's raving about:
Copyright (c) 1991 Linus Torvalds.
The Finn gets the copyright because he started it, even though it
wouldn't
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 01:42, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines. IMHO we ave to create a
DFDG, Debian Free Documentation
Followups to -legal.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:07:02AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
I mentioned Thoreau in another thread, and the Bible in another; though
they are free in every sense, perhaps that would be a place where we
would need to be careful about modifications. I'm sure John Stuart
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
in Debian.
Documentation isn't software. Neither are
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
the book's content, but has every reason to be protected from
modification. These
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
the book's content, but has every reason to be protected from
modification. These
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:04:15AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
Using my book as an example, there have been many patches submitted either
for spelling or content. I have included all those that were correct ;-)
I have never seen the book published with changes that were not made by
me,
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
As a small example, consider that someone might wish to condense part of
your book into a reference card that can be mounted on a mousepad.
Unfortunately, the license will requires that Ian M's history of Debian
be reproduced
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:26:11PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
As a small example, consider that someone might wish to condense part of
your book into a reference card that can be mounted on a mousepad.
Unfortunately, the
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
in Debian.
In any case, I don't see why an invariant rant about the evils of
Microsoft-extended Kerbeous (for
This one time, at band camp, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines. IMHO we ave to create a
DFDG, Debian Free Documentation Guidelines.
I wrote this up last night after getting fed up with this thread, then
modified it this morning after reading the thread on
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines. IMHO we ave to create a
DFDG, Debian Free Documentation Guidelines.
Why? What freedoms are important for software that aren't for documentation?
If the GFDL fails the DFSG, I'd say
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
Revisionist history, for one. I'm sure the FSF wouldn't appreciate the
GCC document being modified to make it look like Linus Torvalds wrote
GCC, for example.
How does the GFDL stop that? I can add a section to the GCC
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:57:42PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines. IMHO we ave to create a
DFDG, Debian Free Documentation Guidelines.
I wrote this up last night after getting fed up with this
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
Why? What freedoms are important for software that aren't for
documentation?
Revisionist history, for one. I'm sure the FSF wouldn't appreciate the
GCC document being modified to make it look like Linus Torvalds wrote
GCC,
This one time, at band camp, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
I wrote this up last night after getting fed up with this thread, then
modified it this morning after reading the thread on -legal that was
referred to. Flame away.
http://people.debian.org/~jaq/jfdl.html
Of course, I meant
This one time, at band camp, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:57:42PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
http://people.debian.org/~jaq/jfdg.html
Well written. Thanks.
One issue though:
The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
--^^^
Shouldn't it say
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
DFSG stand for Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
in Debian.
Documentation isn't software. Neither are conffiles, icons, etc. So,
if we're to be true
27 matches
Mail list logo
