Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- Send legal mailing list submissions to
- To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
- https://lists.gpl-violations.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
- or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
- You can reach the person managing the list at
- When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
- than "Re: Contents of legal digest..."
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:11:03 -0400
- Subject: Re: Are these license terms considered free?
- Quiliro Ordóñez <[email protected]> writes:
- > http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/base/third_party/purify/pure.h?view=markup
- >
- > /*
- > * Header file of Pure API function declarations.
- > *
- > * (C) Copyright IBM Corporation. 2006, 2006. All Rights Reserved.
- > * You may recompile and redistribute these definitions as required.
- >
- > Are these license terms considered free?
- Free as in OSI-free or DFSG-free? Most certainly not, but why would you
- care for an interface to a proprietary tool?
- Hendrik
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:20:25 -0500
- Subject: Re: Are these license terms considered free?
- El 24/03/11 10:11, Hendrik Weimer escribió:
- > Quiliro Ordóñez<[email protected]> writes:
- >
- >> http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/base/third_party/purify/pure.h?view=markup
- >>
- >> /*
- >> * Header file of Pure API function declarations.
- >> *
- >> * (C) Copyright IBM Corporation. 2006, 2006. All Rights Reserved.
- >> * You may recompile and redistribute these definitions as required.
- >>
- >> Are these license terms considered free?
- > Free as in OSI-free or DFSG-free?
- FSF Free
- > Most certainly not, but why would you
- > care for an interface to a proprietary tool?
- This is one file in Chromium. I thought most if not all was free.
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:45:29 -0700
- Subject: HTC claiming Linux Kernel is Apache
- Hello
- Twice now in the last year HTC has denied my requests for Kernel source, by telling me and
- others that it is covered under the Apache license, and not GPL2. I was hoping maybe someone
- here with more rights to complain (a contributor to the kernel perhaps) would be willing to send
- a written request to their legal department, as HTC recently told one of my friends to do.
- We are seeking the HTC Thunderbolt kernel source, but have been told either no they don't
- have to release it as it is Apache. Another employee sent us a form letter stating it will be released
- in 60-120days.
- Justin
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:32:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: HTC claiming Linux Kernel is Apache
- hi,
- > Twice now in the last year HTC has denied my requests for Kernel
- > source, by telling me and
- > others that it is covered under the Apache license, and not GPL2. I was
- > hoping maybe someone
- > here with more rights to complain (a contributor to the kernel perhaps)
- > would be willing to send
- > a written request to their legal department, as HTC recently told one of
- > my friends to do.
- I just did that...
- > We are seeking the HTC Thunderbolt kernel source, but have been
- > told either no they don't
- > have to release it as it is Apache. Another employee sent us a form
- > letter stating it will be released
- > in 60-120days.
- Sigh. HTC *really* should change their helpdesk responses.
- armijn
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- [email protected] |http://www.uulug.nl/| UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:55:28 -0400
- Subject: Re: Are these license terms considered free?
- Quiliro Ordóñez <[email protected]> writes:
- > El 24/03/11 10:11, Hendrik Weimer escribió:
- >> Quiliro Ordóñez<[email protected]> writes:
- >>
- >>> Are these license terms considered free?
- >> Free as in OSI-free or DFSG-free?
- > FSF Free
- >> Most certainly not, but why would you
- >> care for an interface to a proprietary tool?
- > This is one file in Chromium. I thought most if not all was free.
- You can simply delete this file without doing any harm unless you want
- to use a proprietary debugger.
- Hendrik
- --Forwarded Message Attachment--
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:13:09 -0700
- Subject: Re: HTC claiming Linux Kernel is Apache
- Armijn,
- Can you give me more details on what you just did? I am trying to document what is going on,
- as we have gotten many people to complain to HTC (even core kernel developers) and the only
- results are of ignorance, and refusal.
- Justin
- On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Armijn Hemel <[email protected]> wrote:
- hi,
- Twice now in the last year HTC has denied my requests for Kernel
- source, by telling me and
- others that it is covered under the Apache license, and not GPL2. I was
- hoping maybe someone
- here with more rights to complain (a contributor to the kernel perhaps)
- would be willing to send
- a written request to their legal department, as HTC recently told one of
- my friends to do.
- I just did that...
- We are seeking the HTC Thunderbolt kernel source, but have been
- told either no they don't
- have to release it as it is Apache. Another employee sent us a form
- letter stating it will be released
- in 60-120days.
- Sigh. HTC *really* should change their helpdesk responses.
- armijn
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- [email protected] |http://www.uulug.nl/| UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment