|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| All what follows is my opinion only. (...) authors "give up copyright". Let's not confuse PD with right of redistribution. Let's not confuse giving up copyright with right of redistribution. What I am suggesting is that by posting a part to the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.932) |
|
|
| all, property (score: 0.932) |
|
|
| all, property (score: 0.932) |
|
|
| property (score: 0.932) |
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Thank you for that clarification. I meant that I choose lines that I believe are absolutely drawn out. My point was that I am not the only one who adheres to drawn lines. We all do. (...) Eh, when the perspective is from the Creator of the (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.931) |
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) No one thing!!! People often pull this "sky is falling" gimick about some trivial little detail claiming that a change will cause the collapse of society. If we granted universal marriage rights to homosexuals -- as we would if we were a (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.931) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) You are correct here, I should have used the term 'file' or 'work' instead of 'part'. From a copyright standpoint I mean 'work of an author'. (...) There are two ways to looks at this issue. 1) Get permission of all those involved and get them (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.931) |
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) But you're wrote "You draw your lines, I draw mine." That is an explicit statement of self-imposed limitations. Is that your intent? Or do you really mean "You draw your lines, I adhere to absolute lines drawn out for me by millennia-old (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.931) |
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I realize this and I believe in an absolute morality, but he doesn't. I am trying to appeal to his sensibilities, not mine (which I know he flatly rejects). I am arguing on his turf, as it were. (...) I assume you are talking about when I (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.931) |
|
| | The Torturers Among Us
|
| Count on a professional newspaper columnist to articulate so clearly what I have been saying for the past three years. The Bush Administration has abused the 9/11 tragedy as an excuse to engage in a deplorable deterioration of human rights. The (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.930) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) Is a non commercial clause part of the SteerCo's intent? It wasn't mentioned in the initial post or in Larry's update. Could you clarify for me? Discounting the use of rendered parts in commercial products, eg. Larry selling ldraw rendered (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.929) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) I am not sure I mind allowing SteerCo/LDraw.org to relicense my parts under a different license, but I definitely don't want to give SteerCo/LDraw.org any special rights. That would also be a violation of point 5 in The Open Source Definition (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.929) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) Well first of all there are different things being granted. An author grants rights to a particular part (each time he or she uploads that part), not the entire library. The user gets rights granted to the entire library as a whole. However, (...) (20 years ago, 26-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.928) |
|
|
| all, property (score: 0.928) |
|
| | Re: ------( Terms of use for lugnet.com )------
|
| (...) <snip> About the terms of use... Wow, those are a mouthful, aren't they? USENET doesn't have any. Why should LUGNET? Well, if you read them carefully, you'll see that a lot of thought (and discussion, they've been modified somewhat from the (...) (24 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.people.newbie)
| |
| all, rights, property (score: 0.928) |
|
|
| all, rights, property (score: 0.928) |
|
|
| all, rights (score: 0.928) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| This is post to sum up my ideas before I pop off on holiday for a few days. 1) Consider making the license apply to more than just parts or the parts library. This would allow things like documentation or software to be distributed too. 2) I would (...) (20 years ago, 28-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.927) |
|
|
| all, rights (score: 0.927) |
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) <snip> I've taken the chance to read the threads mentioned earlier in this thread. And I've made a version of the license (based on the previous Steve Bliss version) that handles both author->ldraw.org requirements and author->EndUser (...) (20 years ago, 26-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
| all, rights (score: 0.927) |