On Monday 03 April 2006 11:46, Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:58:26AM +1000, Troy Rollo wrote:
> Is there a case possible where neither can be constructed without
> hassle? Think something like: insurance against GPL violators.
The insurance company has to be able to demonstrat
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:58:26AM +1000, Troy Rollo wrote:
> On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:43, Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> > To enforce the licence one doesn't need any copyright (asignment)
> > at the work at all. You just need to be appointed by (one of) the
> > copyright holder(s) to enforce it.
>
>
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 09:58 +1000, Troy Rollo wrote:
> This is correct - the only reason you would need to own the whole of
> the copyright is if you wanted to re-license in circumstances or under
> terms not within the existing licence.
Even more reason to assign only partly the copyright. That i
On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:43, Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> To enforce the licence one doesn't need any copyright (asignment)
> at the work at all. You just need to be appointed by (one of) the
> copyright holder(s) to enforce it.
This is not generally the case. If you don't own the copyright, you can
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 05:59:49PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 22:33 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > > There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that
> > > organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license
> >
> > Copyright assignment in o
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 22:33 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that
> > organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license
>
> Copyright assignment in other projects has been tricky, and it can't be
> done retroactively. It
* Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [31/03/06, 23:27:51]:
> 2. Non-profit organization
>
> There are many advantages to having a non-profit organization for a
> project, for instance to allow tax-exempt donations, or hold assets
> like trademarks. However it's a lot of paperwork to do, so w
There will also be the possibility of assigning our copyrights to that
organization, which would make it easier to enforce the license
Copyright assignment in other projects has been tricky, and it can't be
done retroactively. It usually requires developers to submit paperwork -
we don't reall
Folks,
As announced at the last Wineconf, Jeremy and myself have been working
for a few months now with the Software Freedom Law Center on a number
of legal issues concerning Wine. We've been mostly quiet about it, so
I thought I'd post a status update. There are two major tasks going
Here is something else to consider. With respect to property taxes, who
owns a piece of software and who is liable for the taxes on it? Some of
the current licenses may well make the software seller and not the buyer
liable in some states.
Brian Vincent wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 07:38:42 -0600, Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been speaking privately with Eben Moglen about this
new effort, and he tells me that they would like to
have the Wine Project as one if their very first clients.
I think this is an excellen
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 07:38:42 -0600, Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been speaking privately with Eben Moglen about this
> new effort, and he tells me that they would like to
> have the Wine Project as one if their very first clients.
I think this is an excellent idea.
Your three
Hi Folks,
There is an exciting announcement out today:
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS7711938137.html
Essentially, OSDL has funded a community oriented pro-bono
legal service for Free and Open Source Software Projects.
The Center is led by Eben Moglen, the chief counsel for
the FSF.
I've been s
13 matches
Mail list logo
