On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 14:35 -0400, Arc Riley wrote:
> IANAL and am not presenting a legal opinion. What I am speaking about
> here is based on numerous conversations I've had with lawyers in the
> "IP" (sic) field.
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Jamie Jon
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 10:34 -0400, Arc Riley wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Jamie Jones
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Multiple tar.gz files could probably fix that - or requiring
> users to
> checkout from the revision co
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 16:15 +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/9/18 Jamie Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Multiple tar.gz files could probably fix that - or requiring users to
> > checkout from the revision control system. That may very well mean the
> > data will
find out why they picked the license
they did, and once you have done that, see if they would be interested
in relicensing it to match the code.
Presenting the argument it is a single copyrighted work so you must
release it under the codes license, is not likely to help your case, and
is likely to antagonise the copyright holder.
Regards
Yagisan
--
Jamie Jones
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG/PGP signed mail preferred.
PGP Key ID 0x4B6E7209
Fingerprint E1FD 9D7E 6BB4 1BD4 AEB9 3091 0027 CEFA 4B6E 7209
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
4 matches
Mail list logo
