[ntp:questions] Re: Windows - Seven Days Later
David L. Mills
mills at udel.edu
Thu Oct 14 01:20:41 UTC 2004
You're talking about the copyright page I assume. There's actually legal
reasons I won't change the wording or "clarify" the intent. This would
mean some folks assume different "rights" than others. I want a
completely level playing field with no ex parte "clarification". I don't
want to get scissored in the middle.
The most important issue is that the University of Delaware remains the
copyright holder of this work with individual authors acknowledged as
listed. If somebody wants to rip it off in other products or sell it on
a CD, both of which have been done, that's fine and I hope you get rich.
Just be sure the UDel copyright notice is posted somewhere under the hood.
IBM gave me a nasty time. They wanted me to sign away certain rights,
hold them blameless, etc., and sent a lawyer, unannounced, to my office
for signature. I threw him out of my office, unannounced.
Harlan Stenn wrote:
>>This is basically always the situation with "free" software distributed
>>as source (BSD don't accept that ntpd is open source, because they say
>>licence appears not to allow distribution on paid for CDs, which is
> They can choose to believe that all they want. It doesn't make it true.
> The problem is that they want Dave (I believe) to clarify things, and I
> gather Dave has "done the dance" often enough that he does not want to
> spend time doing that anymore.
>>why openntp exists, and why I didn't say open source). Any sensible
>>free software licence will always disclaim all warranties (commercial
>>software suppliers generally also try this, of course).
More information about the questions