Re: pine in other distributions?
On 29 Sep 1999, Peter Makholm wrote:
> David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> writes:
>
> Reply-to set to -legal
>
> > Furthermore, there is NO clause explicitly forbidding distribution of
> > modified versions; the only clause that mentions patches binaries is the
> > one concerning Local modification.
>
> If it not explicit allowed it is disallowed. Thats how copyrightlaws i
> most of the world works (US inclusive).
'k. I won't argue with you; I'm not too versed in legal practice.
> Local modification is not local if they are distributed.
True.
> > I suggest one of the guys on Debian-legal makes contact with UW and asks
> > for their consent to distribute a Pine vx.yDebian binary. I do believe
> > them to be pretty reasonable.
>
> Yes but then it must go into non-free: License must not be specific to
> Debian.
Sure, but that was what I said in my first post, anyway.
/David
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
Reply to: