On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 07:48:50PM -0700, David Johnson wrote:
> I got pulled into a discussion on a non-software mailing list regarding
> fonts. It was claimed that redistributing the Lucida fonts was illegal.
> This surprised me since these are included with XFree86, which I still
> consider to
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 05:59:04PM +0100, SamBC wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kristiono Setyadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> > What about the other version of Linux (like RedHat, Slackware, etc.)?
> > Can we say that the Kernel of the Linux have been change
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 09:57:48PM -0700, David Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Aug 2000, Kristiono Setyadi wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, David Johnson wrote:
> > In some countries, the copyright is some of the most frequently violated.
> > Most of the microsoft (and other commercial software..) are
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 09:57:48PM -0700, David Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Aug 2000, Kristiono Setyadi wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, David Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > If you modified the kernel and distributed it under a different
> > > license, you will get in serious trouble. It is not a crime e
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 04:32:01PM -0700, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > There *is* a Sun Public License modeled
> > after the NPL, pretty much s/Netscape/Sun/, which Netbeans was released
> > under (www.netbeans.org).
>
> Sorry, my bad, the Sun Public L
I am sorry that your experience was so bad. However, I don't recall sending
you a previous reply, and it is certainly not my habit to send mail without
a signoff signature. Are you sure it was from me? I'm also sorry that I
didn't find your earlier license submission, but if you re-post it I'll
I echo SamNC experience with OSI. I also had to ask
for confirmation of receipt of my license and I got a
blunt one line reply witjout even a signing off
signature from Mr.Rosen. I thought maybe because I
don't have the pedigree of corporate backing that my
effort was not as useful to OSI. I see t
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
>
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > There *is* a Sun Public License modeled
> > after the NPL, pretty much s/Netscape/Sun/, which Netbeans was released
> > under (www.netbeans.org).
>
> Sorry, my bad, the Sun Public License is a verbatim (except for
> subs
On Wed, 09 Aug 2000, SamBC wrote:
> > You cannot do whatever you want with GPL software... Only public domain
> > has that distinction, and even there you can't claim authorship.
>
> I overstated - you can do *most* what you want - most people wouldn't want
> to do the things they can't!
Well,
To all OSI license reviewers:
I have listed below all "open source" licenses that have been submitted to
OSI for approval. If you have submitted a license that does not appear on
this list, please let me know. I also list those licenses that have already
been approved.
You'll note that many of
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> There *is* a Sun Public License modeled
> after the NPL, pretty much s/Netscape/Sun/, which Netbeans was released
> under (www.netbeans.org).
Sorry, my bad, the Sun Public License is a verbatim (except for
substitution of the terms "Mozilla" and "Nets
> -Original Message-
> From: Brice, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> I've seen may requests for OSI license certification over the past year. I
> would be helpful if you could publish a list of licenses pending
> review, and
> their priority, so those of us that have submitted a li
The 'license' statement sounds to me (IANAL) as though use and distribution
in all forms is okay provided that the fonts are not altered, and that you
may use the trademarked names of the fonts only to identify the
font/typeface.
IANAL, but it seems logical to me.
SamBC
> -Original Message
Sometimes I overstate I guess...
> -Original Message-
> From: David Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> On Tue, 08 Aug 2000, SamBC wrote:
>
>
> The Redhat boxed set contains proprietary and non-redistributable
> software (and some proprietary but still redistributable software). I
>
I've seen may requests for OSI license certification over the past year. I
would be helpful if you could publish a list of licenses pending review, and
their priority, so those of us that have submitted a license can know where
it is in the process.
Richard Brice
WSDOT
-Original Messa
15 matches
Mail list logo
