On 19/08/05, Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Granted.
But when the question is is the GFDL a license suitable to release free
documentation? their answer is very different from our... :-(
That's the main reason I came to debian-legal first. If someone could
point me in the direction
Ricardo Gladwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/08/05, Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when the question is is the GFDL a license suitable to release free
documentation? their answer is very different from our... :-(
We don't really have a shared concept of free documentation
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 10:48:13AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
I was hoping to review the Open Game License[1]. Although not a
software license, it has been used in the popular PCGen software
application which could, hypothetically, be added to Debian at some
point.
[1]
On 22 Aug 2005 10:48:13 GMT, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if the freeculture.org groups are good for this? You will find
a range of opinions there, but other than the anti-commercial strand,
it's not that different most of the time.
I actually find few people agree that the
On 22 Aug 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
I was hoping to review the Open Game License[1]. Although not a
software license, it has been used in the popular PCGen software
application which could, hypothetically, be added to Debian at some
point.
[1] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/ogl.html
I
On Monday 22 August 2005 02:45 am, Ricardo Gladwell wrote:
I was hoping to review the Open Game License[1]. Although not a
software license, it has been used in the popular PCGen software
application which could, hypothetically, be added to Debian at some
point.
Funny story about the Open
On 22/08/05, Sean Kellogg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny story about the Open Game License!!! This summer I intered for Wizards
of the Coast in their legal department.
Your kudos just went up in the gamer community. In some circles,
people would happily give up their right arms to inter at
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:49:57PM +0100, Ricardo Gladwell wrote:
On 22 Aug 2005 10:48:13 GMT, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if the freeculture.org groups are good for this? You will find
a range of opinions there, but other than the anti-commercial strand,
it's not that
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 06:09:36PM +0100, Ricardo Gladwell wrote:
1) they consider the OGL to be similar to how Linux is licensed.
I think this is a dubious claim
It's so vague that you can claim it about just about
anything. Windows is licensed in a similar manner to Linux because
the
On 22 Aug 2005 10:48:13 GMT MJ Ray wrote:
Ricardo Gladwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/08/05, Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when the question is is the GFDL a license suitable to
release free documentation? their answer is very different from
our... :-(
We don't
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 21:47 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Plus the Debian project as a whole. We already had that GR. You lost,
badly.
Oh, and that whole creative commons mob. Yeah. Real few people.
Wow. That seemed unnecessarily hostile. I'm not really sure what you
think I lost but I
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 03:07 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
I prefer the more charitable interpretation that you want
debian-legal's advice because you think you'll agree more with our
viewpoints than with other possible suppliers of license advice.
Thank you for the polite summary: your
Scripsit Ricardo Gladwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 21:47 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Plus the Debian project as a whole. We already had that GR. You lost,
badly.
Oh, and that whole creative commons mob. Yeah. Real few people.
Wow. That seemed unnecessarily hostile. I'm not
13 matches
Mail list logo
