ACK, but upstream said that modified versions of project's source code are
subject to US Copyright laws.
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Hi all,
There are several packages (including GCC and Linux) in Debian that
contain files released under several different BSDish licenses that are
missing the explicit modification permission. Many of these files
contain comments indicating that they likely have been modified. I
think that these
On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 5:41 AM Francesco Poli wrote:
> Then, the strategy could be similar to [flashplugin-nonfree]:
> a package (in Debian contrib) that automatically downloads and install
> the non-free module from the upstream distributor, and installs it...
IIRC the Debian maintainers of Fire
On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 13:13:26 +0800 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 9:38 AM Mihai Moldovan wrote:
>
> > I wonder why no one brought it up yet, but here we go: IMHO,
> > downloading pre-defined proprietary software should completely
> > be disabled/removed in Firefox and the proprietary Wi
My understanding is that copyright always applies unless explicitly given
up via a public domain declaration; registering with a copyright office is
an *optional* step which doesn't affect the status of the work ---
unregistered works are still copyrighted. The GPL license itself depends on
the wor
Hello,
Yesterday I filed RFP for PCYNLITX [1]. Although PCYNLITX is licensed under
GPLv3, the upstream applied copyright
registration to US and Turkey Copyright offices, as stated in the home page:
- An application to the US Copyright office has been performed for the modified
version of the s
6 matches
Mail list logo
