Subject: Re: what happened to the lm75(?) driver?
To: NetBSD Kernel Technical Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/12/1999 23:35:20
[ On Monday, September 13, 1999 at 12:36:25 (+1000), Simon Burge wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: what happened to the lm75(?) driver?
> > > * 3. Neither the name of the author(s) nor the names of its
> > > * contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived
> > > * from this software without specific prior written permission.
> > Now I'm confused. I thought this (#3) was the "advertising clause" that
> > TNF wanted to eliminate on individual developer copyrights yet here it
> > is in black and white (at least on my monitor! ;-).
> This is not the original "advertising clause 3", it's the original
> "clause 4". The original "advertising clause 3" was:
> 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
> must display the following acknowledgement:
> This product includes software developed by the University of
> California, Berkeley and its contributors.
That's what I thought.
That's why the wording of my terms is indeed quite different.
The only thing I care about advertising and promotional material is that
my name *NOT* be used except with my explicit permission for each and
every instance of its use.
I do want my name to be recognized as a contributor though and since
TNF attempts to cater NetBSD towards binary distribution I feel that my
clause requiring separate and explicit notice of my contribution is the
only way I'm going to attain such acknowledgment for each and every
possible form of re-distribution.
That's why I have asked repeatedly for clarification and that people
re-read my terms very very carefully and to tell me exaclty what is
wrong and to propose precise wording changes that would abate their
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>