On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 05:35:29PM -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> Well, what about a hardcopy of the O'Reilly book plus a one-sentence
> dedication to my dog? To be more realistic, how about the statement
> "Printed 2002 by FooBar Inc". It seems that allowing aggregate
> for-profit distribution is the same as allowing for-profit
> distribution of the original. It seems to be a nonsense restriction,
> and makes me think that the O'Reilly people haven't quite thought
> through the implications.
IANAL!
If the case will occur O'Reilly can figth an holy war against who made
the redistribution and try to demostrate what is an aggregate
distribution and waht is not!
[ BTW the same "nonsense restriction" is reported in the DFSG, so
probably also we "haven't quite thought through the implications."? ]
Anyway I don't care about this. These are O'Reilly's problems.
I just want to know if the reported requirements imposed by O'Reilly are
free enough to satisfy DFSG or not.
BTW, since now I have seen no progress talking on this list to learn
what I'm looking for. Does exists an "official" authority that can say
if the reported requirement fall in the DFSG-free category? If such an
authority does not exists I will put the book in non-free section.
Woody is coming and I don't want to miss the package for a long long
long legal disquisition.
Tnx for all.
Cheers.
--
Stefano "Zack" Zacchiroli <zack@cs.unibo.it> ICQ# 33538863
Home Page: http://www.cs.unibo.it/~zacchiro
Undergraduate student of Computer Science @ University of Bologna, Italy
- Information wants to be Open -
Attachment:
pgpl4YLYc6a15.pgp
Description: PGP signature