Dirk,
Please don't apologize, you write far better in English than I do in
any other language.
I agree with you that the situation is unclear, and the response I got
did not help.
I also regret that I cannot include NET in the final package. If they
clarify the IP situation, or adopt a real license, I will of course
reconsider then.
As I said to them, I do not think there is any chance of widespread
adoption of a timekeeping system if explicit permission is required
for distribution OR commercial use. The response I received did not
point out any mis-interpretation.
Best,
Tim West
On Jun 6, 11:10 am, Dirk Zemisch <dzemi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hallo rtimwest,
>
> rtimwest <rtimw...@gmail.com> schrieb am 04.06.2009 16:17 Uhr:
>
> > I contacted the folks at New Earth Time through their web page about
> > the apparent conflict between the GPL(s), Creative Commons License,
> > and their copyright notice that states that explicit permission must
> > be obtained in order to "distribute" or use NET commercially. AFAIK,
> > the Creative Commons License allows commercial use, and the GPL does,
> > but with stipulations intended to ENSURE free distribution, not
> > restrict it.
>
> English is not my native language (far from it), but I understand the
> statement on the NET website as focussed on 'commercialization', not
> distributing. But I'm fully agree with your arguments that this point
> needs a clear explanation from degree NET Ltd.
>
> The used terminology ('The [...] concept is intellectual property of')
> doesn't sound like an invitation to use the concept.
>
> > I received a short but polite response from Mark Laugesen, who has
> > "New Earth Time, Canberra" in his e-mail sig. He expressed some
> > interest in TiddlyWiki, and also expressed regret at the situation,
> > but made no concrete offers or promises to change anything.
>
> In my humble opinion ist doesn't help - nor you for distributing the
> plugin, neither the propagation of NET.
>
> > I'm not all all certain that they could make this stick- it seems to
> > me unlikely that dividing the day into 360 units is the sort of thing
> > that can be protected by copyright, although they can probably at
> > least do that with the name. The CONCEPT would only be patentable (in
> > theory) if there were no prior examples... but IANAL, and have no
> > vested interest in contesting their claims or promoting their idea
> > against their wishes.
>
> I'm fully agree and I'm sure, that there are a lot of regions on earth
> where such concepts never will get a protection by law.
>
> > Accordingly, the prototype program NETTimePlugin has been removed from
> > my accessible sites, even in it's pre-release form, even though it was
> > not linked to, to prevent any possibility of "distribution".
>
> It's a pity! Again for both - te concept and your implemtation. But I
> understand your irritations and support this decision.
>
> Regards!
> Dirk
> --
>
> signature.asc
> < 1KViewDownload
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To post to this group, send email to TiddlyWiki@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
