Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
- From: allan1956 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 19:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
- Message-id: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20060620225641.GA16822@doctormoo.dyndns.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
It's curious why sun thinks htye need FAR?DFAR clauses.
They have added similar language in the CDDL License.
By the way; the OSI has approved the CDDL as being complaint with thier
guidelines, which I beleive are similar to DFSG, so inclusion of the
FAR/DFAR clause doesn't seem to be a problem.
In I as a goverment contractor provide software without proper
'markings/legends', such as the paragraph in discussion, then its possible
we run into issue where the Gov can claim unlimted rights.
But as someone noted above, that can't count if I pass along someone elses
software, if they haven't put the right marks/legend, I can't put them in
So perhaps Sun just wants to CYA or thier free licenses got written by
someone from thier commercial world :)
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Sofia-SIP-COPYRIGHTS-tf1793900.html#a5192947
Sent from the Debian Legal forum at Nabble.com.