Hi all,
I'm new dealing with licenses and I've been trying to catch up, however
I need advice.
Edward M Barlow wrote "conquer", a middle earth multi-player curses
based game, and posted it in USENET at comp.sources.games around 1987
and 1988. Later Adam Bryant contributing with code and patching
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm new dealing with licenses and I've been trying to catch up, however
> I need advice.
>
> Edward M Barlow wrote "conquer", a middle earth multi-player curses
> based game, and posted it in USENET at comp.sources.games around 1987
> and 1988. Later Adam Br
Henri Sivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2006, at 21:51, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Henri Sivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> The mutable copy doesn't help much if the platform is designed to
> >> refuse to run modified versions.
> >
> > I disagree. It helps by advertising that mutability to users
Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The case has been made that CCPL3.0 is DFSG-non-free because it does not
> allow the distribution of content in TPM'd format[0]. I assert that not
> only is this argument false, it is actually reversed: allowing TPM
> distribution, even with parallel d
MJ Ray writes:
> Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A system which applies encryption, but is not enforced under law is NOT
>> a "TPM" in the legal sense of the word, and is therefore not "being used
>> to restrict" a work (legally).
>
> Adding the adverb "legally" does not change the m
Michael Poole wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > * The following file "trade.c" was written by Adam Bryant who
> > * gives all rights to this code to Ed Barlow provided that this
> > * message remains intact.
>
> IANAL, but this looks like an effective conveyance of copyright to me.
I would r
On 10/9/06, Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Without a piece of paper with Adam's signature saying otherwise,
the copyright remains with him. So Ed should ensure he does not
change the copyright notice.
That brings me a new issue, with more doubts, so I reproduce the messages I
had
The new BSD and GPL licenses are considered compatible, but how are the requirements of the BSD license satisfied when BSD licensed code is included in GPL projects (eg, the Linux kernel)?Is clause 3 of the BSD license ("The name of the author...") GPL-compatible?
Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
> Michael Poole wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> > * The following file "trade.c" was written by Adam Bryant who
>> > * gives all rights to this code to Ed Barlow provided that this
>> > * message remains intact.
>>
>> IANAL, but this looks like an effective convey
Juan M. Mendez wrote:
> My doubt is, how this license transfering of the Adam Bryant code
> could affect the old code of version 4 of conquer released in 1988 in
> USENET, the one that Ed allowed me to relicense as Free Software.
That really depends on what Adam put in his contract with that
gamin
"Juan M. Mendez" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So, I have been investigating.
It seems Adam Bryant developed a new version 5 of conquer:
http://www.cs.bu.edu/ftp/fs/pub/adb/beta/
where all the files hold notices disallowing redistribution of the
code with a notice
starting with.
Matthew Wala wrote:
> The new BSD and GPL licenses are considered compatible, but how are the
> requirements of the BSD license satisfied when BSD licensed code is included
> in GPL projects (eg, the Linux kernel)?
Keep the copyright notices on all BSD source code and keep the
BSD license text an
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 21:45:46 -0500 Terry Hancock wrote:
[...]
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Wait, wait: if the TPM are based on public key cryptography, you
> > could have the necessary key for applying them, but not the key
> > that's needed to pull them off. In that case, when you receive an
>
Michael Poole wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
> > Without a piece of paper with Adam's signature saying otherwise,
> > the copyright remains with him. So Ed should ensure he does not
> > change the copyright notice.
>
> This is certainly a curious definition of "writing" and "signature" --
> w
Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
> Michael Poole wrote:
>> Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
>> > Without a piece of paper with Adam's signature saying otherwise,
>> > the copyright remains with him. So Ed should ensure he does not
>> > change the copyright notice.
>>
>> This is certainly a curious definition
So, as a briefing, it seems an electronic permission can be enough,
the same licenses are now for source code.
And about conquer, I talked againt to Ed, it seems he keeps the right
of version 4, and it was version 5 the one that Bryant developed and
probably used with that company.
Being complet
Client Update:
We were able to view your credit report and recent application but still need
for you to complete our finalization form.
As of today we will be able to lock your refinance in at the rate we promised,
but if our finaliztion form IS NOT completed within 24 hours then the rate wi
Michael Poole wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
> > However I didn't see a signature in the text file.
> > Only the guy's name.
>
> At least in the US, the relevant law (why I mentioned "affirmative
> acts") is what make click-through agreements binding -- the act of
> clicking is the user's el
Juan M. Mendez wrote:
> Being completely reworks for the game, could it be safe to relicense
> version 4, no matter what Adam did with version 5?
If version 4 and version 5 have competely different codebases
and were written by different people, then the author of
version 4 can do whatever he want
19 matches
Mail list logo
