Sent from my HTC ----- Reply message -----
From: "ref...@gmx.net" <ref...@gmx.net>
To: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org>
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] ISV status?
Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 07:08
Sorry for top posting.
You were yesterday off list notified, with detailed evidence that you are
distributing dozens and dozens of copyrighted modules for which you have no
permission.
There appears to be no change to that when I checked last s couple of hours
ago. So your repeated on-list reassurances to be willing to follow our
guidance sound hollow and thoroughly dishonest to me.
Wrt submission of modules, the wiki describes the process well. To be submitted
osis files are to be sent to modules@crosswire. Org.
Sent from my HTC ----- Reply message -----
From: "Andrew Thule" <thules...@gmail.com>
To: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org>
Subject: [sword-devel] ISV status?
Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 06:06
Chris, I should add in response to your last comment, if you ever find I'm
distributing something I shouldn't be - please don't hesitate to tell me. I'm
more than happy to remove it.
As it stands now however I have done exactly what you asked when you've asked -
so you should have no complaint against me.
~A
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Andrew Thule <thules...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Chris Little <chris...@crosswire.org> wrote:
I credit you for taking it down, but you haven't explained why YOU felt it was
YOUR place to do it in the first place. 'Andrew Thule posts the module on his
FTP site' is not part of our release process.
Because I was trying to help. I assumed that module development was covered
under licenses, and have no other way to share modules I create with members of
this list.
The wiki doesn't prohibit the sharing of Copyrighted modules under development,
so it was reasonable to assume since the module itself was being distributed to
the word, modules being developed could be distributed also.
Yet, why would that have anything at all to do with you? You have no connection
to the publishers, you didn't do the conversion, and you are in no way a part
of the release process.
You say you checked the distribution rights presented in isv.conf, but it
contained exactly the string present in those modules that we have told you in
the past that you may not re-distribute. You prevent reading of other such
.confs on your FTP site, so you're clearly aware that this is material you
should not be re-distributing. But you did it anyway, because you're content to
act without thinking.
I'm a member of this list, trying to help, volunteering my time, and Nic's
question wasn't directed at anyone in particular. He was asking about a
version of the ISV which contained the OT, which I had.
Why wouldn't it have anything to do with me? Is there something somewhere that
says only certain members of this list can help? Where does it say only those
folks directly connected to the publisher can make improvements?
Yes, as in my other response, you're still pressing away at the false idea I
ignored the licenses. You still have to clarify that bit with respect to who
can and who cannot offer improvements and whether or not development is
excluded from 'distribution'. I was offering an improved module (and OSIS) TO
Crosswire for distribution by Crosswire's repo.
I admit that my thinking is limited at times. In this case it is limited by
what I don't know - which is why you've been asked for clarification.
~A
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
