Bienvenue sur eagle-usb.org

WikiEagle

DebianLegal

PagePrincipale :: DerniersChangements :: DerniersCommentaires :: ParametresUtilisateur :: Vous êtes ec2-34-206-3-58.compute-1.amazonaws.com
Those are links of interest to debian-legal archive, you can have a look at DroitFrancais [fr] and CommunicationLibre [en] (hardware-firm oriented) or DroitDesMarquesLinux [fr]

I do not read everything (nor even understand everything I read !) and I sometimes think that this ML debian-legal is turning my inbox to junk (it's quite verbose !).
Beware, some terms have to be well understood before grasping the meaning of thoses threads (which sometimes include trolls) whether it is legal or about debian social contract.
Particularly, seek definitions for free / contrib / non-free which correspond to Debian packages categories

Licenses related to artwork

http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html [en] creative commons are not free by debian interpretation, suggestions to enhance them
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg01194.html [en] original draft discussion
http://freecontentdefinition.org/Definition [en] other definition

http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-legal@lists.debian.org/msg34944.html [en] CC 3.0 are going the right way, see NewsCreativeCommons30 [fr]
http://www.nabble.com/Annonce---Compatibilit%C3%A9-GFDL---CC-by-sa-td14113884.html [en|fr] GFDL and CC-by-sa to become compatible (used by wikimedia foundation)

https://linuxfr.org/~akauffmann/19408.html [fr] CC / Art Libre a view compared to free software and its 4 freedoms

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-uk/2004-October/000104.html [en] hum, some discussion about CC and how nd (non derivatives) should be enforced... /o\

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/04/msg00485.html [en] problem(s) with public-domain by Nathanael Nerode (neroden)

http://lwn.net/Articles/61292/ GPL is a licence, not a contract

General licenses : code and documentation

http://www.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl.html Open SSL license not compatible with GPL (advertising clause)
http://cygwin.com/licensing.html [en] exception for distribution of opensource not-GPL-compatible programs compiled with cygwin's library


http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 [en] GFDL is non-DFSG compliant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License
http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/fsfe-france/2003-05/msg00033.html [fr] how to apply GPL 2 or later, when GPL 3 becomes available it can apply by default (or not) unless people contest it

http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070901041657 [en] dual licensing BSD & GPL, good practices to respect *BSD developers work

https://linuxfr.org/~MilkaJinka/25621.html [fr] Domaine public et WTFPL

http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/25/436 [en] "mark USB drivers as being GPL only" in the Linux kernel, thanks to Greg

To Do : search for URL, sort in categories (trademark, license compatibility, binary blobs...)























Some professional constraints

When working on free software, NDA and default attribution of copyright to the employee's firm are a plague that has to be cured...
http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/nopanicing
there's another one describing the agreement to obtain by the employee from the firm to retain his/her copyright

http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&q=contrat+de+travail+GPL&btnG=Recherche+Google&meta= [fr] work agreement for free software
http://fsffrance.org/contrats/travail.fr.html [fr] clauses for GPL / GFDL contributions for software & documentation
https://linuxfr.org/~benjdto/8182.html [fr] attribution par défaut à l'employeur

see CommunicationLibre for firms wanting to enter the libre software world

History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeywell_v._Sperry_Rand [en] patents, computer's inventor
Il n'y a pas de commentaire sur cette page. [Afficher commentaires/formulaire]