> No, but filing a software patent will earn you the enmity of the Debian
> developers.
Not only developers...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday 03 June 2004 8:03 pm, Alvin Oga wrote:
> as soon as one loads mozilla .. you have a mix of gpl and mpl
>
> and one already have a mix of licenses .. even in debian ? [1]
> see openwall patches vs glibc, procps
If you _really_ want to see them all, or at least most of them:
gre
Please do not CC me. Good rule of thumb: unless the Reply-To or
Mail-Followup-To tells you to send elsewhere, don't CC it when you're
replying.
Alvin Oga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>> There's not 40 GPLs, there's one.
>
> version 1 and version 2 ...
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
> There's not 40 GPLs, there's one.
version 1 and version 2 ... can be counted as 1 or 2 ??
> And the vast majority of software
> in Debian is licensed under it. Check the Debian Free Software
> Guidelines for a general idea of what you can and can't do
Alvin Oga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> hi ya adam
>
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Adam Aube wrote:
>
>> The only "strings" attached to the GPL involve distribution and derivative
>> works, and are as follows (paraphrased):
>>
>> 1) If you distribute the software, you must make the source freely availabl
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 14:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
Alvin Oga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> doesn't that depend on which "gpl" license ... ( there's over 40 "gpl"
> license ... but only 2(?) gnu.org "gpl" license
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses
Huh? This is the first time I've ever seen *anyo
Howard Levine wrote:
> Should I develop a patentable extension to the Debian opus, is there any
> claim against my profit?
Adam Aube writes:
> Not unless it is a derived work.
Nor if it is. The licenses (not everything is GPL) on the components of
Debian are about copyright, not patent.
--
John
hi ya adam
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Adam Aube wrote:
> The only "strings" attached to the GPL involve distribution and derivative
> works, and are as follows (paraphrased):
>
> 1) If you distribute the software, you must make the source freely available
> 2) Derivative works must also be released un
Howard Levine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I understand the license to freely copy, alter, and distribute the
> software. Does anyone have claim against my USE of it, or my profit
> with it at business other than programming per se?
Yes, but only if you don't also release your source code. IAN
Howard Levine wrote:
> I understand the license to freely copy, alter, and distribute the
> software. Does anyone have claim against my USE of it, or my profit with
> it at business other than programming per se?
There is nothing that prevents you from making money off of the use or sale
of GPL
Howard Levine writes:
> I understand the license to freely copy, alter, and distribute the
> software. Does anyone have claim against my USE of it, or my profit with
> it at business other than programming per se?
No one has any claim against your use of Debian or your profit by it, full
stop.
>
I understand the license to freely copy, alter, and distribute the software. Does anyone have claim against my USE of it, or my profit with it at business other than programming per se? Should I develop a patentable extension to the Debian opus, is there any claim against my profit?
Do you
12 matches
Mail list logo
