nymisunderrated

4 ms·

1.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
Thank you. I asked because the expression "MPL with GPL exception" wasn't clear to me. You may want to know that in the past few years, MPL 2.0 was released, which embeds a so-called "GPL compatibility" by default.
2.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
Thank you for coming forward in many discussions (not only HN), and giving time for people's questions. I resent the way things went down, such as removing people's repositories, and paying gitorious developers to shut down the pr
3.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
"We have the CLA to ensure this we're on the right side of copyright law." The CLA is only a license, another license than MIT, but doing _almost_ the same things. IIRC, the difference is that it gives you okay to make propri
4.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
From the point of view of copyright, I think this scenario may not have the results you want: the user is effectively preparing a derivative work. In fact, your wrapper is. Preparing a derivative work is an exclusive right of the copyright
5.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
He has a lot of knowledge in copyright law. In areas related to the GPL, corporate lawyers don't necessarily match that knowledge.
6.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
What is MPL with a GPL exception?
7.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
The organizations with lawyers behind them won't, and quite can't, do it. They're not supposed to give legal advice in general terms, no one is. Now, if individuals would be willing to work together to put up such a site, as
8.
by nymisunderrated 12y ago
It's a good question if it does "weaken copyright". That would be a good thing, and a primer in thirty+ years, because it would equally reduce its breadth from proprietary applications. By what I see now (from old and new, bu