Re: notmm is dead!

Date	2012-10-05 09:10 -0600
From	Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com>
Subject	Re: notmm is dead!
References	(2 earlier) <20121004181157.31c1083520ff8230242962e1@gmail.com> <CAPTjJmq6=5ehYSwbD6kbtyvns8zdMigLE+a+U0=HDjQmh59xuA@mail.gmail.com> <20121004191351.8c6fcfd8ddad7b6e6bfc02f2@gmail.com> <506E487B.3010704@gmail.com> <20121005064347.10aa9146cc3c053b14dbeaca@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.1854.1349449857.27098.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/05/2012 04:43 AM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> No. All past notmm licenses were and still ARE ISC licensed. The license fee
> is simply because I'm shifting into commercial license for new releases, including
> the newer 0.4.5 version... Pypi was not the authority source for notmm and 
> neither anyone can claim the license was left blank, thats once again a form of plagiarism. 
> 
> Shall anyone is really serious about supporting the work i did then he'll want to pay a minimal fee to get
> the proper license rights and can contact me off-list if he want to fork a branch
> to github of google code.

Someone certainly could fork any past ISC version and proceed from
there.  That is simply my point.  Without any license fees and without
any accusation of "plagiarism."  Indeed it wouldn't be plagiarism
because your name would still be on it, and copyright assigned to you.

I don't know what you are talking about with the plagiarism thing.  If
there indeed was a tarball out there with an empty license file all that
would do would be to prevent the downloader from legally doing
*anything* with the file.  That's all the original poster was saying.

We're just trying to be clear on the terms here, not accusing you of
anything, nor trying to denigrate all your hard work.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: notmm is dead! Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-10-05 09:10 -0600

csiph-web