Hello,
I am packaging a web based database administration tool.
The program itself is licensed as GPL version 2.
If my question is already answered somewhere else I apologize, since I
couldn't find a definitive answer, or are not competent enough in law :)
It uses some javascript from a differen
This is a filter detection notice generated by Sendmail Attachment
Filter v2.6.0 at rsc046e0. The original message was being transferred
from pD904B625.dip.t-dialin.net (217.4.182.37), and was ultimately
accepted.
The scanned parts of this message contained 1 infection(s), 0 of which
were succ
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:09:52AM +0200, Remco Seesink wrote:
> It uses some javascript from a different author and this is the license:
>
>
> No Nonsense Copyright and License for JSRS JavaScript Remote Scripting
> ==
>
> Copy
"Chloe Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This happens not infrequently in the U.S. (and at least other common law
> countries). The "foreign" law is provided by the parties through argument,
> declarations/affidavits and expert testimony. Here is an example case where
> a Pennsylvania court
@ 14/05/2004 19:17 : wrote Nathanael Nerode :
margin of non-free. And 2a is more honored in the breach than in the
observance; even the FSF doesn't try to follow it to the letter.
Yeah, they *do* accept changelogs instead. But it's not to be ignored,
either.
--
br,M
+
HOT STOCK FOR MONDAY MORNING May 17th, 2004
CSRZ.PK IS EXPECTED TO EXPLODE, GET IT IMMEDIATELY!
+
Our last profitable offers:
> DCZ - we profiled at 60 cents and it went to $1.20
Some people wait a lifetime
For a moment like this
Why wait a lifetime to meet that very special person?
http://alovelife.com
/web/?oc=53034770
Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:09:52AM +0200, Remco Seesink wrote:
>>>From this:
>>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation
>>It seems to me that the GPL applies to the JSRS software too. And the "No
>>Nonsense"
>>requirements for no further restrictions would b
Walter Landry wrote:
>Rather, they would file in California court, because that is where
>California law is decided. The whole point of choice of law clauses
>is to force everything to happen in a particular place.
No; to my knowledge, this is simply wrong. California law can be decided in
fede
Walter Landry wrote:
>But the venue doesn't necessarily favor one party over the
>other.
Both sides waiving the right to a jury trial? Yes, it doesn't necessarily
favor one party over the other. (Neither does choice of venue, which we also
Don't Like.) I still think it's non-free; I mean, gee
Andrew Suffield wrote:
>I don't see what's so interesting about the group of things in which
>copyright would subsist if the world were different.
Perhaps you've missed the point. I'll try more detail:
Whether there exists a valid copyright on a work depends on
* aspects intrinsic to the work
*
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 06:15:07PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Walter Landry wrote:
> >But the venue doesn't necessarily favor one party over the
> >other.
> Both sides waiving the right to a jury trial? Yes, it doesn't necessarily
> favor one party over the other. (Neither does choice of
On May 17, 2004, at 19:10, Steve Langasek wrote:
IIRC, jury trials are only a Constitutional right where *criminal*
proceedings are concerned, not for civil suits.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed
twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury sha
Jacqueline Mayer,)
The [EMAIL PROTECTED] will all0w you to receive
all the [EMAIL PROTECTED] that you 0rder with your remote contr0l,?
payperviews,XXX-movies,sp0rt events,special-events%,RND_SYB
http://www.9006hosting.com/cable/
needful ,battlefront
,eaton ,walnut .
14 matches
Mail list logo
