On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A philosophical point first: I believe that attempting standards
> enforcement through copyright licensing is fundamentally broken. We've
> seen this tried several times, with the Artistic (control over "Perl"
> name), and SCSL licenses, the results
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 09:51:40PM -0800, Brian Behlendorf
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[...]
>A philosophical point first: I believe that attempting standards
>enforcement through copyright licensing is fundamentally broken. We've
>seen this tried several times, with
on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 09:51:40PM -0800, Brian Behlendorf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Patrik Wallstrom wrote:
> > http://www.projectmayo.com/opendivx/divx_open_license_v10.txt
> >
> > This license has not been approved by OSI, has it?
> >
> > They call OpenDivX an Open Sou
On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Patrik Wallstrom wrote:
> http://www.projectmayo.com/opendivx/divx_open_license_v10.txt
>
> This license has not been approved by OSI, has it?
>
> They call OpenDivX an Open Source-project, but limits the code to be
> compatible with the MPEG-4 standard:
>
> 6. Any Codec or
http://www.projectmayo.com/opendivx/divx_open_license_v10.txt
This license has not been approved by OSI, has it?
They call OpenDivX an Open Source-project, but limits the code to be
compatible with the MPEG-4 standard:
6. Any Codec or Larger Works created by you must conform to the
MPEG-4 Vide
5 matches
Mail list logo