debian patent policy?

laims of a patent debian would have nothing to do with it, consistant license be damned. It is all very confusing. And 3 means I can't even ask anyone about this confusion. Can anybody clarify? 3) says not. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blac

Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?

ar. :-) >Really, by now the regulars here all know > what you think about various licenses and, frankly, we don't care to > hear about it any more. > > Please try and find something more constructive to do. > > -- > Steve McIn

Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:15:11PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 04:35:38 -0500 Paul Elliott wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > > > On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 03:21:00 -0500 Paul Elliott wrote: > > > > &g

Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 03:21:00 -0500 Paul Elliott wrote: > > > > > > > My upstream has written a gpl-2 program and > > > > added some Creative commons attribute files in a sub directory >

data and software licence incompatabilities?

, not source files. So the 2 kinds of files are never incorporated in the same "program" so GPL license incompatibility does not apply. Both files are freely distributable under their separate licenses so maybe my upstream is OK? But what do the Debian experts think? -- Pa

Re: Is m4 autoconf code "like a compiler or linker"?

I found out these files have now been packaged. (They used not to be.) So there is no problem. But I would still like to know as a matter of theory, if the use of these files would require that their license be used. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli

Is m4 autoconf code "like a compiler or linker"?

ebian/copyright file that is gplv3+ that allows one to distribute the source package, but gplv2+ that allows the binary package to be distributed? I am thinking about packaging these m4 files under gplv3 separately, so that my package would not have to distribute under gplv

Re: Third party code license issue

r". But because of nihilism of our times, the courts are unlikely to interpret "Good and Evil". The clause should be taken as an exhortation rather than a legal requirement. In our times, those who favor Good over Evil should be encouraged rather than discouraged. They should be

What is source?

ok the new source? Should both be included??? -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally sign

unsourced pdf in tarball; src available from ftp site;

pdfs in future releases. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.