On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
4. The software has been designed for research purposes only and has not
been approved for clinical use. It has not been reviewed or approved by
the
Food and Drug
On 3/7/11, Andrew Ross ubu...@rossfamily.co.uk wrote:
The AGPL and the extra term ensure the consumer's RIGHT to know
that the PDF was produced by iText. Denying this right is IMO
exactly the abuse of Free Software the AGPL wants to avoid.
Exaggerating a bit with the cookie metaphore, I see.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Gerber van der Graaf
gerber.vdgr...@gmail.com wrote:
Is Pepsi Cola is a trademark infringement of Coca Cola?
Cola is a common word that describes the product, so no. If the word
FOAM were a word frequently used to describe things of this type with no
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Stefan Baur
newsgroups.ma...@stefanbaur.de wrote:
Hi,
I have a system where the output of vrms claims that there are no non-free
packages installed.
Does that mean all software on this system falls under one or more of the
licenses that are stored under
4 matches
Mail list logo
