1 |
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 10:56:57AM +0200, Jon Lech Johansen wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 10:38:20AM +0200, Fredrik Jagenheim (humming@×××××.com) wrote: |
3 |
> > Which, in a twist of irony, makes /him/ guilty of copyright |
4 |
> > infringement. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Heard about fair use? |
7 |
|
8 |
Yeah, I know. Making a commentary on copyrighted works falls under the fair use |
9 |
clause. I should've added a smiley on that. |
10 |
|
11 |
OTOH, to get back to the real point; If you are giving away your |
12 |
copyrighted works for free, for the intent purpose of all users to |
13 |
freely use your program, without shipping a license, or even a note, |
14 |
on how this program may be distributed, I think you've made it pretty |
15 |
clear that, unless you tell the offending parties otherwise, you have |
16 |
no problems with it being redistributed. |
17 |
|
18 |
It would be a totally different thing if gentoo earned money on the |
19 |
codecs (which the distribution doesn't), if there was a notice on how |
20 |
redistribution is restricted (like all papers do) or if there was some |
21 |
legal blurb that had to be clicked through (like the sun-jdk). Now |
22 |
there is nothing of this, and as you have already sent mails to the |
23 |
legal departments of apple and microsoft and made them aware of this |
24 |
potential problem, I think we should just sit down and wait for their |
25 |
reaction. |
26 |
|
27 |
//H |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
To segfault is human; to bluescreen moronic. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |