On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:24:50AM +0100, Andrew Stribblehill wrote:
Regarding the concept of taking the copyright of code: it's what the
FSF have been doing since 1992 with Emacs. The difference here is
that if you feel strongly about it, you get to keep your copyright.
The FSF asks
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:12:51AM -0500, Andreas Metzler wrote:
I do not consider this to go much further than that. The intention is
imho the one DFSG4 tries to carter for. The author wants:
a) derivatives being detectable as such.
b) derivatives have to keep out of xinetd's namespace. He
tom wrote:
In UE we have a directive on database, and it says that there's not
copyright on database but there's a new IP right called sui generis. The
difference is that it covers less rights than copyright (remember in the
european version e.g. droit d'auter) and for less time.
The EU
On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 19:08, MJ Ray wrote:
Numerous people have tried many angles. More are welcome, as we
clearly haven't found the correct approach yet.
So, I'd like to write a draft summary for the 6 Creative Commons 2.0
licenses:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
Four
Can you guys on d-l please comment. I think CCing Dwayne would be a
suitable thing too.
Thanks
Zenaan
On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 14:22, Dwayne C. Litzenberger wrote:
I'm not sure if this is the right list to ask on, but what's the
copyright/license status of the Debian Constitution?
Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 14:22, Dwayne C. Litzenberger wrote:
I'm not sure if this is the right list to ask on, but what's the
copyright/license status of the Debian Constitution?
http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
I'm heading up changes to the constitution of a
Here is the relevant replies on debian-user.
On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 04:55, Travis Crump wrote:
John Hasler wrote:
Dwayne C. Litzenberger writes:
I'm not sure if this is the right list to ask on, but what's the
copyright/license status of the Debian Constitution?
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 06:40:08AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
a) Go try and 'reword' a book and try to pass it off as your own.
In a sense, this is what the GNU project is all about.
Stealing from one source is plagiarism, stealing from many sources
is research.
Copyright is not
* Jacobo Tarrio:
O Domingo, 4 de Xullo de 2004 ás 20:54:48 +0100, Andrew Suffield escribía:
They may be covered by database property laws in some jurisdictions.
... which are not Copyright or Intellectual Property laws [...]
Wrong for Germany. Our analogue of copyright law does cover
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 05:35:12AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Jacobo Tarrio:
O Domingo, 4 de Xullo de 2004 ?s 20:54:48 +0100, Andrew Suffield escrib?a:
They may be covered by database property laws in some jurisdictions.
... which are not Copyright or Intellectual Property laws
10 matches
Mail list logo
