[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: X-Oz Technologies

On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 07:54:38PM -0500, selussos wrote:
> > Sue, There is a principle in hermeneutics that says: there are no 
> > useless words.  This means, basically: if you want to say the same 
> > thing, use the same words. If you don't use the same words, you don't 
> > want to say the same thing. Basically, if X-Oz wants the same 
> > disposition as Apache Foundation (license v.1.1) /or/ XFree (license 
> > v.1.0), it should use the same license; or else, the only real -- and 
> > /legal/ -- conclusion is that the disposition is not the same.
> > 
> Herr Heidegger's principle of hermeneutics is not widely accepted
> except outside of modern existentialism and as brilliantly postulated
> by the late Monsieur Satre.  But, if I am to follow that very
> principle that you espouse, I would then also ask you to read the
> license in the spirit of the American philosopher-academian, Prof.
> Fish, in which case I can only say that your understanding must be
> different from mine and that all words are useless.  Thus I can only
> ask that we can only argue from the basis of 'common understanding'
> and 'common application'.  Anything else would be too relativistic to
> gain much headway and I do not have that type of time (unfortunately
> ;-( to partake in such a heady discussion.

That's quite all right, we need not have a sophisticated understanding
of philosophy to resolve the present understanding.

* The Debian Project generally respects the copyright holder's
  interpretation of the copyright license the copyright holder places on
  a work;
* It is reasonable to assume that X-Oz Technologies, Inc., would have
  used the Apache Software License 1.1 or the XFree86 1.0 license if
  either of those licenses were found to serve the desired purpose;
* To our knowledge, X-Oz Technologies, Inc., is the author of the
  license it used in the XFree86 X server auto-configuration code
  committed to XFree86 CVS by David Dawes in October of last year;
* It reasonable to assume that X-Oz Technologies, Inc., wrote this
  license with an understanding of what it meant.

All we really ask is that you share some of the particulars of that
understanding with us.  A reply to the 8 questions I sent you in a
previous mail[1] should rectify most or all of the ambiguity in the
license that we are wrestling with.

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/debian-legal-200403/msg00032.html

G. Branden Robinson                |    If you wish to strive for peace of
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    soul, then believe; if you wish to
branden@debian.org                 |    be a devotee of truth, then
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    inquire.     -- Friedrich Nietzsche

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: