Evan Prodromou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [...] http://evan.prodromou.name/CC_Licence_Distinctions
I think some of that is shooting at shadows, some is hyperbole
and some is contentious: for example, the "minor techincal
issues" with the CC licences *have* been exploited by licensors
to render works
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:27:06AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > If it's clear and unmistakeable, why is it so easy to mistake?
>
> If it is so easy to mistake, why did only [EMAIL PROTECTED] mistake it?
You don't know that only I did it. I'm just the one who pos
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
So: if there's a public statement by Debian or debian-legal on a
license (like http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary is now), would
it be misleading for an organization to point to that statement?
Especially if it was clear that the review and approval was not an
endorse
On 05/17/2006 05:00 PM, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It's been two years since I started to look at Debian with social
> scientist eyes, and now I started to produce the report of the research.
You may enjoy the "research for dummies" version of debian demographics
with the new google tool:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 12:34:54PM -0400, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> But I think there's some value for people deciding on a license in
> knowing which licenses clearly prevent a work from being included in
> Debian and which do not.
I would think so, too.
> So: if there's a public statement by Debi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Debian and which do not. So: if there's a public statement by Debian or
>debian-legal on a license (like http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary
debian-legal@ is just a mailing list, so it cannot make any statement.
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
The upcoming Creative Commons 3.0 license suite is being tailored
specifically to be compatible with the DFSG and make works licensed
under the Attribution or Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licenses acceptable
for inclusion in Debian.
One of the major criticisms of Creative Commons has been that they
In an effort to combat SPAM, your message has been temporarily quarantined.
TO CONFIRM YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE WITHOUT MODIFYING THE
SUBJECT.
There is no need to include any additional information in your reply. I will be
notified of your original message immediately and yo
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:27:06AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > If AJ meant it as purely a compliment, that's welcome (but
> > > I wait to see) but it seems a strangely-worded one.
> >
> > It is a clear and unmistakeable c
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
>> I agree with a lower limit, but I think it would be better of to
>> specify it in terms of "certain number of uploads" as opposed to "some
>> time limit":
>> I might have done 1 upload and just wait a 3 months, or
10 matches
Mail list logo
