Hi, since I brought this up in the first place, I want to bring it down :-) After checking the debian-legal archives it appears to me that "all rights reserved" along with a permissive licence is ok. (all rights reserved alone wouln't - I guess I confused that). sorry for the hassle nomeata Am Di, den 25.05.2004 schrieb Allard Hoeve um 22:28: > > Em Ter, 2004-05-25 às 12:21, Allard Hoeve escreveu: > > > > Copyright (C) 2001 by Curtis "Ovid" Poe <poec@yahoo.com>, all rights > > > > reserved. This program is free software; you may redistribute it and/or > > > > modify it under the same terms as Perl itself. > > > > > > The two lines in the copyright notice contradict each other. In the one > > > line you reserve all rights to the software, in the other you license it > > > like Perl istself. > > > > I'm not sure of that. The use of GPL or Artistic License (perl terms) > > does not imply you to not being the owner of the software. Both licenses > > are licenses granted by the owner to the "customers". > > > > Maybe we should ask on debian-legal (or maybe I'm just wrong)... > > Good idea. I'm not listed at debian-legal myself. If you are, could you > please forward this to debian-legal and report back? > > Regards, > > Allard -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: joachimbreitner@amessage.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil