> Guido van Rossum writes:
> > Ask your own lawyer.
John Hasler:
> We don't have one. We cannot afford to pay attorneys, and they evidently
> do not consider free software projects worthy of their pro bono efforts.
>
> > I really can't tell what harm there is here.
>
> The license clearly grant
Guido van Rossum writes:
> Ask your own lawyer.
We don't have one. We cannot afford to pay attorneys, and they evidently
do not consider free software projects worthy of their pro bono efforts.
> I really can't tell what harm there is here.
The license clearly grants the right to redistribute t
> > > What about buying a Debian cdrom, or borrowing one, or getting a copy
> > > from someone on a floppy disk?
> >
> > Ask your own lawyer. I really can't tell what harm there is here.
> > Everyone else seems to find the licence acceptable if a bit tedious to
> > read -- I'm the first to admit
>
> > What about buying a Debian cdrom, or borrowing one, or getting a copy
> > from someone on a floppy disk?
>
> Ask your own lawyer. I really can't tell what harm there is here.
> Everyone else seems to find the licence acceptable if a bit tedious to
> read -- I'm the first to admit the latt
> What about buying a Debian cdrom, or borrowing one, or getting a copy
> from someone on a floppy disk?
Ask your own lawyer. I really can't tell what harm there is here.
Everyone else seems to find the licence acceptable if a bit tedious to
read -- I'm the first to admit the latter but I am una
Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does this mean that one has to actively "request release" (contact
> > CNRI in some way?) before one is a "Licensee" by this definition?
> Yes -- but the requesting of the release happens by downloading the
> software ;-)
What about buying a Debia
> I replied to the list and later realized that you probably do not
> subscribe to it. So here is a courtesy copy. :-)
Indeed. I didn't see your message in the list archives either.
> Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 1. This CNRI LICENSE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") by and betw
Gregor Hoffleit writes:
> Can I summarize this as follows: The license looks DFSG-free and
> therefore ok for us apart from (4).
Yes.
> (7) sounds a little bit obfuscated, but in the end it only says something
> like "if you breach this license, we will try to tell you to stop
> breaching, and if
Thanks for the comments so far. I'll present what I have to CNRI's
management. I think some of the suggestions about what to do with the
OROmatcher license are implementable.
> The bits about "pressing the button" etc. don't make sense in the license
> document that accompies the source distri
> > news://news.mozilla.org/36AF89D1.7C95097B%40netscape.com
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The URL didn't work...
Subject: planned updates to the Netscape and Mozilla Public Licenses
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:49:05 -0800
From: Jim Hamerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 21 h 20, the keyboard of Steve Greenland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've always understood that placing a (formerly/potentially) copyrighted
> work "in the public domain" is a statement by the author that they are
> giving up all copyright rights (if that's the c
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 08:59:27AM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen wrote:
> As found on Linux Today:
> news://news.mozilla.org/36AF89D1.7C95097B%40netscape.com
The URL didn't work...
--
Anticipation is the sweetest form of torture...
[I'd suggest cc'ing Guido in replies in this thread to (that's as I think
he's not subscribed to the list ? Guido, the thread is archived as
http://www.de.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-legal-9901/msg00211.html]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) wrote:
> Guido van Rossum writes:
> > A note on cla
As found on Linux Today:
news://news.mozilla.org/36AF89D1.7C95097B%40netscape.com
Ray
--
Obsig: developing a new sig
Henning Makholm writes:
> Does this mean that one has to actively "request release" (contact
> CNRI in some way?) before one is a "Licensee" by this definition?
I don't think so. I think that if they put the package up on their web
site and say to the world "Have at it!" that the law would deem a
15 matches
Mail list logo