Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Messages

Between

and

Dear all, I'd like to give you a brief update on the data we provide around the {metæffekt} Universe (https://github.com/org-metaeffekt/metaeffekt-universe). We recently added the translations of

By Karsten Klein · #3085 ·

Re: license submission tool

Hi Jilayne. Following up on today's legal team call, I added a comment to the related GH issue: https://github.com/spdx/spdx-online-tools/issues/336 -- I'd like to help with this if my skills

By John M. Horan · #3084 ·

Re: Invitation: SPDX Legal Team meeting - 2022 @ Every 2 weeks from 12pm to 1pm on Thursday from Thu Jan 6, 2022 to Sat Dec 31, 2022 (EST) (spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org)

I’d prefer this suggested ‘2nd and 4th Thursday’ meeting lineup. One vote from me. Christina

By Chen, Christina X <christina.x.chen@...> · #3083 ·

Re: Invitation: SPDX Legal Team meeting - 2022 @ Every 2 weeks from 12pm to 1pm on Thursday from Thu Jan 6, 2022 to Sat Dec 31, 2022 (EST) (spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org)

Hi Sebastian (and spdx-legal list), My turn to apologize for the slow reply here :) For the next legal team meeting, we'll stick with today's call at the usual time of noon Eastern, to avoid

By Steve Winslow · #3082 ·

Re: font licenses from Fedora submitted to SPDX License List

Jilayne, I can help with this. I'll look over the notes you sent and let you know of any other questions I might have. Christina Sent with BlackBerry Work (www.blackberry.com)

By christina.x.chen@... · #3081 ·

Re: license submission tool

Hi agan, I realized that I did not give any context in this email and, as we have quite a few new people on the legal team (yeah!), some context would be helpful. As you may or may not be aware, we

By J Lovejoy · #3080 ·

license submission tool

Hi all, We had an issue to update the “comments” field to be more prominent and specifically ask how the license meets the license inclusion guidelines -

By J Lovejoy · #3079 ·

font licenses from Fedora submitted to SPDX License List

Hi all, I’m posting this to both SPDX-legal and Fedora-legal. I have just finished doing a compare of all the “good” font licenses for Fedora with the SPDX License List. As a result, I have

By J Lovejoy · #3078 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

~ Steve Winslow [2022-01-10 22:33 +0100]: Following up on Steve's proposal, I see many people agreeing on it, or at least shrugging. There has been a proposal by Alexios that would require a larger

By Max Mehl · #3077 ·

Re: Invitation: SPDX Legal Team meeting - 2022 @ Every 2 weeks from 12pm to 1pm on Thursday from Thu Jan 6, 2022 to Sat Dec 31, 2022 (EST) (spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org)

Dear Steve, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you! I had thought it was rather convenient that each Thursday of the month had a different SPDX meeting; I know that some people might find it

By Sebastian Crane · #3076 ·

meeting Thursday

Hi all, We have our regularly shielded legal team meeting at 9am Pacific time, Thursday. For our agenda: I’ll give an update on Fedora using SPDX identifiers and then have a look at any issues

By J Lovejoy · #3075 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

<jaeger=jbb.de@...> wrote: I am not sure SPDX should get involved in influencing norms around license text inclusion, as I think it should be responding to the world as it is rather than

By Richard Fontana · #3074 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

Dear Steve and list members, In my opinion it is a good idea to add the license text of the GPL-3.0 to the SPDX license information. The simple reason is that the text that pretends to be the

By Till Jaeger · #3073 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

Thanks Alan, Max and Alexios for your thoughts. A couple of responses inline below: Even setting aside the use case that REUSE has raised here (reproducing license texts), there's another good reason

By Steve Winslow · #3072 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

Thinking about it more generally, I think the issue stems from the assumption that “one license == one file”. I am not sure everyone should rely on this being true in all cases. For the SPDX

By Alexios Zavras · #3071 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

Steve, thank you so much for summarising the discussion, and the Legal Team for working on the topic. I regret that I did not join the call, but from what I see you basically got everything covered

By Max Mehl · #3070 ·

Re: License text for LGPL-3.0

I agree with this approach to use optional for the additional text. The ambiguity of what portion of the repo is covered by a license still exists regardless of this decision so it’s not something

By Alan Tse · #3069 ·

License text for LGPL-3.0

Hi all, This is a follow-up from the discussion last summer at [1], based on the conversation during the Legal Team call this past week. Folks may want to re-read the (long) thread there, which has

By Steve Winslow · #3068 ·

Re: Invitation: SPDX Legal Team meeting - 2022 @ Every 2 weeks from 12pm to 1pm on Thursday from Thu Jan 6, 2022 to Sat Dec 31, 2022 (EST) (spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org)

Hi Sebastian, Thanks for checking on this. I think this is meant to be the schedule -- let me know if the invites aren't lining up correctly: * General Meeting: First Thursday of every month,

By Steve Winslow · #3067 ·

Re: Invitation: SPDX Legal Team meeting - 2022 @ Every 2 weeks from 12pm to 1pm on Thursday from Thu Jan 6, 2022 to Sat Dec 31, 2022 (EST) (spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org)

Dear Steve, Thanks for sending this out! Since the SPDX Outreach Team meetings had been moved in 2021 to fit in with the Legal and General meetings, I'm wondering if you could offer some

By Sebastian Crane · #3066 ·

321 - 340 of 3405

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms