Scripsit Pierre Machard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Last week a RC bug was filled on this package (#223197). A good solution
> to close this bug is probably to upload a newer version,
No, it seems to be yet another fallout of the linux-kernel-header
transition. There are quite a lot of those at the mo
[ Adding -legal to the Cc; it may become inappropriate for -devel, at ]
[ some point, in which case folks should remove the -devel Cc. The -bsd ]
[ Cc should probably remain no matter what, as this could potentially ]
[ affect any of the BSD ports.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank Küster) writes:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
>>
>>> Wouldn't such a book be allowed? I can't see anything that would stop
>>> it.
>>
>> You're probably right. I wasn't looking for something that wouldn't be
>
Dear all,
does anybody know what is going to happen with regard to LPPL-1.3, and
in which timeline? The latest mails I found were
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200306/msg00206.html
(a new draft)
and two analyses by Branden Robinson, with one follow-up by Frank
Mittelbac
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank Küster) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
>
>> Wouldn't such a book be allowed? I can't see anything that would stop
>> it.
>
> You're probably right. I wasn't looking for something that wouldn't be
> allowed, but for something that is as close as possi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
>
> Wouldn't such a book be allowed? I can't see anything that would stop
> it.
You're probably right. I wasn't looking for something that wouldn't be
allowed, but for something that is as close as possible as linking. It
seems that what I invented, alt
Rahul has invited you to join Rahul's personal
and private network on Ryze.
To view the invite, click on:
http://www.ryze.com/in/P4qjjgGbhzs8pJBCIBfQ
Ryze is a networking service that helps
people grow their careers, businesses and lives.
* meet entrepreneurs, CEOs and other neat p
Rahul has invited you to join Rahul's personal
and private network on Ryze.
To view the invite, click on:
http://www.ryze.com/in/yyXOSc48EJOdzekCfQab
Ryze is a networking service that helps
people grow their careers, businesses and lives.
* meet entrepreneurs, CEOs and other neat p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank Küster) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
>
>> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> But anyway, although computer programs definitely are recognized
>>> as subject to copyright in the EU, they do not fit the definition
>>> of "derivative
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> But anyway, although computer programs definitely are recognized
>> as subject to copyright in the EU, they do not fit the definition
>> of "derivative work" or "adaptation" very well. There just is no
Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Exactly my point. What would the equivalent of dynamic linking be? A
> book that says on the first page: take chapters 3 and 6 from book Foo
> and insert after chapter 4 in this book, then read the result.
Wasn't there a case with a book containing questions
M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But anyway, although computer programs definitely are recognized
> > as subject to copyright in the EU, they do not fit the definition
> > of "derivative work" or "adaptation" very well. There just is no
> > guidance in this a
M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The original issue, as far as I understood is, was whether it
> > is allowed to bundle a GPL-licensed plugin with a host program
> > under a GPL-incompatible license. Or actually, a host that
> > also uses a second plugin whic
On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 17:22, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Actually, it's closer than you think. Any "product" [arbitrary
> definition] that requires all three components is a derivative work of
> all of them; that will almost certainly violate one or more of the
> licenses.
It may be; it may not be.
Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But anyway, although computer programs definitely are recognized
> as subject to copyright in the EU, they do not fit the definition
> of "derivative work" or "adaptation" very well. There just is no
> guidance in this area. If you translate somethin
Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
>> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > The package is the result of collection and
>> > assembling of two preexisting materials. However, what is the
>> > reason for qualifying the resulting work as an original
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:34:28PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> > The problem is that all such definitions are based on the notion that
> > a "work" is either something tangible, or a performance act. They
> > simply don't apply well to computer programs.
>
> You're livi
Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The package is the result of collection and
> > assembling of two preexisting materials. However, what is the
> > reason for qualifying the resulting work as an original work
> > of authorship? The definition seems to sugge
18 matches
Mail list logo
