On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 12:49 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 06/27/2012 12:38 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote: > > It's unenforcable if the modules in question do not incorporate any > > OpenSSL code and are just an interface to the library. I think this is > > probably the case. > > Eh? How is a binding to a library not a project that is "derived from" > that library? I don't follow your explanation that the clause is > unenforcable. What makes it unenforcable?
Because if I write the code, I own it. So in the case of a perl module I can call it anything I want unless there is a trademark involved (and, i believe trademarking words is a perversion). Please just disregard my input if you want to play lawyer. I will stop now. -- --gh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
