Unicode

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

Re: Event: SPDX-legal call (2nd Thurs of month) #cal-invite

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

OGC-1.0

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

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

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/

Re: License of an open source license text

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

ANTLR-PD

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

Re: ANTLR-PD

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

Re: New License List website features

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

Re: 3.11 License List release

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

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

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

Re: [spdx] - Do we need a SPDX-License-Identifier for full copyright?

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

Artistic-2.0 derivative - npm License

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

Re: Artistic-2.0 derivative - npm License

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

Re: public domain dedications proliferation

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

Unicode

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

Re: Unicode

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

Re: Unicode

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