Viewing profile — patemmschmitz
patemmschmitz
HN member- Joined
- Wed, Jan 12, 2022, 8:40 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 5
- Public activity
- 12 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About patemmschmitz
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #47348096
A discussion on this point (with some improvements) is now open in the European Commission Interoperable Europe Portal: https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/eupl/di…
-
story
How to clarify the EUPL compatibility clause?
The (2017) EUPL-1.2 compatibility clause is as follow: "If the Licensee Distributes or Communicates Derivative Works or copies thereof based upon both the Work and another work lic…
-
comment
Comment #39894538
GPL doesn't count "Application Service Providers" as distribution, but does not prohibit to do so and to share/publish the combined/modified source code; It is just silent regardin…
-
comment
Comment #39608997
You are right: MPLv2 does not enforce contributing upstream. So you turn your manager into a fool (just a little bit). The MPL is probably one of the best F/OSS licenses: clear, co…
-
comment
Comment #39608593
For me - correct me if I'm wrong, the tivoization issue looks mostly related to what is really a "derivative" of your work (i. e. in case the level of dependency of some hardware d…
-
comment
Comment #39608473
You are right, there is a "double coverage". The EUPL just states that the compatible license (applied to the combined derivative work) will prevail in case it conflicts with the E…
-
comment
Comment #39608331
You could add: - the EUPL, like the AGPL, covers all distribution modes (remote or SaaS...) - the EUPL includes a CDO (contributor declaration of origin) - the EUPL specifies more …
-
comment
Comment #37321841
It is a constant policy, from all "FSF-followers-free-software-activists" to try to discourage, on all public discussion forums, the use of the EUPL that is a copyleft license "oth…
-
comment
Comment #37206613
Agreed. There was a debate on the point "is the EUPL strong or weak copyleft?" It is not "strong copyleft" as the FSF conceives it, simply because European Law excludes license "vi…
-
comment
Comment #35583476
Hello all, I found this debate after 4 days of "internet vacation" to fulfill a dream of my grandson (10 years old) to go with me on the Legoland roller coaster in Denmark. What sh…
-
comment
Comment #35579756
True! Regarding distribution as a service, the EUPL is like the AGPL, but simply written, short and clear. It is copyleft, but allows combined derivatives to be distributed under 1…
-
comment
Comment #29903857
"Communication to the public" is a European Law concept that covers remote access. "Distribution" rather means the transfer of the Work (i.e. to be executed on the recipient device…