Re: Updating the OpenContent license

2000-01-20 Thread Richard Stallman
I agree that different kinds of licenses are appropriate for different kinds of works. I am writing the GNU Free Documentation License for documentation--that is, for manuals. It is also a good license for any sort of textbook. For some kinds of works, such as fiction, permitting just verbatim

Re: Updating the OpenContent license

2000-01-20 Thread Branden Robinson
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 08:31:58AM -0500, Deb Richardson wrote: I think that this is an extremely bad idea. Having more licenses, particularly those like the OPL and the new FSF licenses, is a good thing. Having only one license doesn't do much for an author's freedom of choice, really,

Re: Updating the OpenContent license

2000-01-20 Thread Guylhem Aznar
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 04:34:57PM -0500, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote: the other 50% is a nightmare --- I suggest allowing a polyglot of ill-conceived roll-yer-own licences is tantamount to software patents: Future developers/integrators/authors/users cannot do anything without a lawyer present

Re: Is this Public Domain? And is it DFSG-free?

2000-01-20 Thread Marc van Leeuwen
Scripsit Pontus Lidman [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm looking at a network analysis tool called 'pchar', which has the following license: This work was first produced by an employee of Sandia National Laboratories under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy. Sandia National Laboratories

Re: Updating the OpenContent license

2000-01-20 Thread Guylhem Aznar
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 05:27:23PM -0500, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote: (does anyone really want to modify Alice In Wonderland?) I'd prefer a blue rabbit :-) and should be extended and ammended over time, should be DGPL to be of maximum worth to the community (and probably to the author as

Is this license DFSG compliant?

2000-01-20 Thread Denis Barbier
Hi all, I can not determine whether this license is DFSG compliant or not, and i do not agree with opinions expressed on comp.text.tex about my questions. So could someone confirm this is DFSG compliant, as claimed by the LaTeX Team ? I put `-' marks in front of the 3 lines causing trouble.

Re: Is this license DFSG compliant?

2000-01-20 Thread Martin Schulze
Denis Barbier wrote: I can not determine whether this license is DFSG compliant or not, and i do not agree with opinions expressed on comp.text.tex about my questions. So could someone confirm this is DFSG compliant, as claimed by the LaTeX Team ? I put `-' marks in front of the 3 lines