On Thu 30 Jan Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
> BTW can you give some examples of licences, that explicitly say, that
> whole fscking name must be changed, not just version number? Does such
> beasts really exist?
http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt
> * 5. Products derived from this software may not be ca
On Thursday 30 January 2003 03:41 am, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
> It seems, that some licences require, that modified versions of original
> work must have new name. For example Design Science Licence is like
> that
> But what constitutes "new name"?
> If I release some poem called "Ode to Buffer O
Scripsit Juhapekka Tolvanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> BTW can you give some examples of licences, that explicitly say, that
> whole fscking name must be changed, not just version number? Does such
> beasts really exist?
Many components of teTeX come under such licenses. There was a major
flamewar on
Juhapekka Tolvanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems, that some licences require, that modified versions of original
> work must have new name. For example Design Science Licence is like
> that:
>
> http://www.dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt
>
> [...]
>
> But what constitutes "new name"?
The point
It seems, that some licences require, that modified versions of original
work must have new name. For example Design Science Licence is like
that:
http://www.dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt
"(b) The derivative work is given a new name, so that its name or title
cannot be confused with the Work, or with
5 matches
Mail list logo