1. I note without particular objection that your question is
off-topic
for this list. Like practically all other recent posts, it hasn't had
anything to do with OSI or examining candidate licence for
OSD-compliance.
If you didn't object you wouldn't note.
Why don't you have OSI appoint you
Quoting anon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
If you didn't object you wouldn't note.
We seem to have a quibbler among us.
Why don't you have OSI appoint you moderator?
Otherwise hop on over to Slashdot with the rest of
the obnoxious gamers and script-kiddies.
Oh wait: Correction, we seem to have a
I understood that he was helping me to find the right place to get an answer
to my question so all I can said is thanks for the suggestion and for the
answer.
- Original Message -
From: anon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: Dual
Quoting J.M.Piulachs [Sand!] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
One simple question ... If I have relased a dual licensed software
product (GNU and comercial license) can other GNU licensed software be
added to my code base without license issues?
1. I note without particular objection that your question
Hi *,
which
is going to do some software development as a government contract.
I think ALL Gov software -- since it is PAID for by PUBLIC funds -- and used
for a PUBLIC purpose, should be with PUBLIC licenses.
The software contractors might need to do some hand-holding for the gov.
agency
Here's your biggest problem, IMO:
(From the Open Source Definition
(http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html))
# 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
# The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
# 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
# The
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Mark Rauterkus wrote:
I think ALL Gov software -- since it is PAID for by PUBLIC funds -- and used
for a PUBLIC purpose, should be with PUBLIC licenses.
I agree - and some Danish government agencies do, too. That's why this
project must be Open Source.
PS:
2. If you
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Feller, Joe wrote:
Here's your biggest problem, IMO:
# 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
# The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
# 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
I know. It's kind of interesting: you
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Kenneth Geisshirt wrote:
I think ALL Gov software -- since it is PAID for by PUBLIC funds -- and used
for a PUBLIC purpose, should be with PUBLIC licenses.
I agree - and some Danish government agencies do, too. That's why this
project must be Open Source.
The swedish
Kenneth Geisshirt said:
Sorry, typing error. The idea is to force non-educational to publish
derived work (substitute last not with must, please). GPL can do that, I
guess, but let us assume that I wish to be more liberal with educational
institution (they will never compete on the
Patrik Wallstrom wrote:
The swedish government is having a hard time to have limitations on
software they produce by first copyright, and then further by applying an
open source license on it. They're still investigating how an open source
license can be combined with swedish laws.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, John Cowan wrote:
The swedish government is having a hard time to have limitations on
software they produce by first copyright, and then further by applying an
open source license on it. They're still investigating how an open source
license can be combined with
Patrik Wallstrom wrote:
Well, both have a copyright notice.
True, but what the copyright notice takes away, the license gives back.
In the U.S., there is a legal requirement that what the Federal
government writes through its own employees (as opposed to what it pays
to have written for it)
13 matches
Mail list logo
