t,
Steve
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 7:27 PM Till Jaeger mailto:jae...@jbb.de>> wrote:
Hi Steve,
Thanks for looking into this issue. I have a few additional remarks
below:
Am 21.02.23 um 20:55 schrieb Steve Winslow:
Whoops -- accidentally just sent this to Till, re-sending to th
Hi Stephan fdvt m, c
Von meinem Mobiltelefon gesendet
Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: Group Notification
Datum: 09.01.24 20:07 (GMT+00:00)
An: Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org
Betreff: Event: SPDX-legal call (2nd Thurs of month) #cal-invite
SPDX-legal call (2nd Thurs of month)
Whe
Hi all,
I noticed the following issue:
https://spdx.org/licenses/OGC-1.0.html refers in sec. 2 to the following
link:
"Copyright © [$date-of-document] Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. All
Rights Reserved. http://www. ogc.org/ogc/legal (Hypertext is preferred,
but a textual representation is
I have not the technical expertise to judge the security level of the
following solution that works with Zoom on Linux:
https://www.linux.com/news/how-to-install-and-use-firejail-on-linux/
For some distros like Ubuntu:
$ sudo apt install firejail
$ sudo ln -s /usr/bin/firejail /usr/local/
Hi all,
I have some remarks from a lawyer's perspective who is scanning source code
and/or has to deal with the results from scanning.
1.
It is helpful if the license text file is differently identified from
licensed source files. There are some reasons for that:
- This license text is not licens
Hello list,
I just found out that there is a deviation from
https://spdx.org/licenses/ANTLR-PD.html#licenseText to the linked text from
http://www.antlr2.org/license.html which contains the following language:
"In countries where the Public Domain status of the work may not be valid,
the author g
that language had been omitted prior to when the license list
> was first brought into source control (see
>
> https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/commits/master/src/ANTLR-PD.xml).
> I expect it should be added into the ANTLR-PD ma
Am 13.11.20 um 16:01 schrieb Matija Šuklje:
> Die 13. 11. 20 et hora 15:48 Steve Winslow scripsit:
>> Hi Matija, I think that if there is a desire for an Internet Archive link,
>> that's probably most easily handled by a PR to the particular license XML
>> file in https://github.com/spdx/licens
Hi Steve,
Thanks for sharing.
It seems that there is a small typo in the Note of BUSL-1.1:
" andi the open source "
Best regards,
Till
Am 28.11.20 um 18:59 schrieb Steve Winslow:
> Hello all,
>
> The version 3.11 release of the license list is now tagged and live at
> https://spdx.org/licens
Dear Steve and list members,
In my opinion it is a good idea to add the license text of the GPL-3.0 to the
SPDX license information.
The simple reason is that the text that pretends to be the LGPL-3.0 license
text isn't complete : "This version of the GNU Lesser General Public License
incorpor
Am 06.04.22 um 10:02 schrieb Matija Šuklje:
Die 6. 04. 22 et hora 01:07 J Lovejoy scripsit:
Or is an empty SPDX-License-Identifier always saying that no license has
been chosen and full copyright applies? We think an empty identifier is
ambiguous and also could mean that no license decision
Hi all,
I noticed that NPM is using an Artistic-2.0 with additional terms and
conditions:
-
npm License
Copyright (c) npm, Inc. and Contributors All rights reserved.
npm is released under the Artistic License 2.0, subject to additional
terms that are listed below.
The text of
Am 02.05.22 um 13:43 schrieb Philippe Ombredanne:
Hi Till:
You have eagle eyes!
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:46 AM Till Jaeger via lists.spdx.org
wrote:
I noticed that NPM is using an Artistic-2.0 with additional terms and
conditions:
This is IMHO a total and complete mess and non-sense
I support the idea of Mike. In particular, this would help for both use
and license compliance in (most) European countries.
Please note that in many countries there is no "public domain" in the
field of software since expiration of the term of protection still needs
a few decades and there is no
Dear all,
I'm wondering why https://spdx.org/licenses/Unicode-TOU.html is (still)
part of the license list. Could it be deprecated?
1.
First of all, the current text of the "Unicode® Copyright and Terms of
Use" is quite different from the text which is referenced at
https://spdx.org/licenses/Uni
Of course, it would be nice to have SPDX identifiers
for the most recent versions of the TOU and Unicode-DFS.
Best,
Till
Am 31.10.22 um 12:20 schrieb Till Jaeger via lists.spdx.org:
Dear all,
I'm wondering why https://spdx.org/licenses/Unicode-TOU.html is (still)
part of the license list
PM Till Jaeger via lists.spdx.org
<http://lists.spdx.org> wrote:
Dear all,
Sorry to bring this up again.
1.
I suggest to correct the information on
https://spdx.org/licenses/Unicode-TOU.html
The link provided under "Other web pages for this license&q
17 matches
Mail list logo