Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL

To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
From: olive <olive.lin@versateladsl.be>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:13:51 +0400
Message-id: <[🔎] dv39je$62t$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 4414A2BA.7060700@derobert.net>
References: <87wtf0o0pv.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <[🔎] 44139D0F.9050106@derobert.net> <[🔎] 20060312094854.GY11104@zewt.org> <[🔎] 4414A2BA.7060700@derobert.net>

Of course, the final authority on the meaning of a license would be the
Supreme Court (at least in the US).

Debian is an international project and not a US project. I don't thinkthat many non US Debian users or developer will be happy with that.Would you agree if a say that the final authority on the meaning of alicense is the Belgian court (I am from Belgium)?


Olive

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
  - From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
- Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
  - From: Anthony DeRobertis <anthony@derobert.net>

References:
- Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
  - From: Anthony DeRobertis <anthony@derobert.net>
- Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
  - From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
  - From: Anthony DeRobertis <anthony@derobert.net>

Prev by Date: Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Next by Date: Re: (OT) Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Previous by thread: Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Next by thread: Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread