discuss: Documentation licensing


Previous by date: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: Documentation licensing, David Merrill
Next by date: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: New doc suggestion, Philip W. L. Fong
Previous in thread: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: Documentation licensing, David Merrill
Next in thread: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Documentation Licensing, Rahul Sundaram

Subject: Re: Documentation licensing
From: ####@####.####
Date: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0205241139220.16899-100000@lotus.slothmud.org>

> As I understand the law (not being an attorney), the LDP is an
> "unincorporated association", and is perfectly capable of holding
> copyrights and otherwise acting as a legal entity.

This may be the case, but it is not recognized as one "legally" until you
fill out the paperwork to become one.

-- 
Brian Hayward


Previous by date: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: Documentation licensing, David Merrill
Next by date: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: New doc suggestion, Philip W. L. Fong
Previous in thread: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Re: Documentation licensing, David Merrill
Next in thread: 24 May 2002 16:40:42 -0000 Documentation Licensing, Rahul Sundaram


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.