Re: question on a licence
Hi Noel! You wrote: But I don't know if the licence is free for the Debian Free Software Guidelines ( http://www.de.debian.org/social_contract.html#guidelines ). * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose on * any computer system, and to alter it and redistribute it freely,subject * to the following restrictions: * 1. The author and the University of Manitoba are not responsible *for the consequences of use of this software, no matter how awful, *even if they arise from flaws in it. * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either by *explicit claim or by omission. Since few users ever read sources, *credits must appear in the documentation. * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be *misrepresented as being the original software. Since few users *ever read sources, credits must appear in the documentation. * 4. This notice may not be removed or altered. Looks like a BSD-ish licence to me, so you should be ok. -- Kind regards, +---+ | Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sait exactement ce | || que l'on va faire, a quoi| | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | bon le faire?| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Pablo Picasso | +---+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: question on a licence
* Noel Koethe | $ less COPYRIGHT | /* | * Copyright University of Manitoba 1998. | * Written by J. Gary mills | * | * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose on | * any computer system, and to alter it and redistribute it freely, | subject | * to the following restrictions: | * | * 1. The author and the University of Manitoba are not responsible | *for the consequences of use of this software, no matter how awful, | *even if they arise from flaws in it. | * | * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either by | *explicit claim or by omission. Since few users ever read sources, | *credits must appear in the documentation. | * | * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be | *misrepresented as being the original software. Since few users | *ever read sources, credits must appear in the documentation. | * | * 4. This notice may not be removed or altered. | */ I don't see any problems with this license, it says that you have to say that if you modify the sources, you have to say where you got the sources from - similar to the BSD license. Also, they have a no-warranty section, which is just fine. So, I don't see what you might think that would be a problem with the license. | Sorry, if this is the wrong list. Please tell me the right one. debian-legal, but -mentors isn't too bad either. :) -- Tollef Fog Heen Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: question on a licence
Hi Noel! You wrote: But I don't know if the licence is free for the Debian Free Software Guidelines ( http://www.de.debian.org/social_contract.html#guidelines ). * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose on * any computer system, and to alter it and redistribute it freely,subject * to the following restrictions: * 1. The author and the University of Manitoba are not responsible *for the consequences of use of this software, no matter how awful, *even if they arise from flaws in it. * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either by *explicit claim or by omission. Since few users ever read sources, *credits must appear in the documentation. * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be *misrepresented as being the original software. Since few users *ever read sources, credits must appear in the documentation. * 4. This notice may not be removed or altered. Looks like a BSD-ish licence to me, so you should be ok. -- Kind regards, +---+ | Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sait exactement ce | || que l'on va faire, a quoi| | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | bon le faire?| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Pablo Picasso | +---+
Re: question on a licence
* Noel Koethe | $ less COPYRIGHT | /* | * Copyright University of Manitoba 1998. | * Written by J. Gary mills | * | * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose on | * any computer system, and to alter it and redistribute it freely, | subject | * to the following restrictions: | * | * 1. The author and the University of Manitoba are not responsible | *for the consequences of use of this software, no matter how awful, | *even if they arise from flaws in it. | * | * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either by | *explicit claim or by omission. Since few users ever read sources, | *credits must appear in the documentation. | * | * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be | *misrepresented as being the original software. Since few users | *ever read sources, credits must appear in the documentation. | * | * 4. This notice may not be removed or altered. | */ I don't see any problems with this license, it says that you have to say that if you modify the sources, you have to say where you got the sources from - similar to the BSD license. Also, they have a no-warranty section, which is just fine. So, I don't see what you might think that would be a problem with the license. | Sorry, if this is the wrong list. Please tell me the right one. debian-legal, but -mentors isn't too bad either. :) -- Tollef Fog Heen Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are.
