On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:46:15PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> Patented software does not have to be patent-encumbered (for example, we
> have many programs and libraries in both main and non-US/main that use
> CAST5 [0], which is patented). Patent-encumbered software would use
> things like L
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 06:47:18PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> If it's electronically (YM digitally?) stored, then I say it's software.
> I see no reason to make this word a synonym for "computer programs",
> and in practice I see people refer to a large variety of digitally
> stored data as
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:45:39AM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:46:15PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > Patented software does not have to be patent-encumbered (for example, we
> > have many programs and libraries in both main and non-US/main that use
> > CAST5 [0], whic
Drew Scott Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is the an implied copyright notification (I.e. "code added by person")
> sufficient in the debian/copyright or is it necessary to say
> explicitly say "year copyright person"?
There is no such thing as "implied copyright".
But that doesn't reall
Barak Pearlmutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With a little help, I've composed a draft DFSG FAQ. It meant as an
> introduction to issues discussed on debian-legal, with some general
> background material to help bring naive readers up from ground zero.
I like it. I would suggest:
* In the s
5 matches
Mail list logo
