[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] ERIC SMITH, PLEASE!!! ;-) uname reply - a final proposition


Thank you for taking the time to reply.  This clarification is 
_VERY_ appreciated.  Of your reply, I retain the following:

On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Eric R. Smith wrote:

> >> On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Martin-Eric Racine wrote:
> >> 
> >> > PS:  Atari Corp. is gone, so is the copyright on MiNT still an issue?
> >> >      Can't we just finally use the more generic "MiNT" instead of
> >> >      "Fresh/Free/Friggin/FryingMiNT" to identify our OS??
> The copyright is definitely still an issue -- my copyright is still
> valid, and I'm sure that Atari's rights have been acquired by another
> party (I think Hasbro probably got them at the same time as they
> got the rights to Atari's games.)
> The relevant section of the copying license is:
>     b) any binary compiled from a modified version of the MiNT 
>        source code must, when executed, print a notice stating 
>        that it is a modified version of MiNT
> Having said all that, I don't believe that the output of
> "uname" is covered in any way by the MiNT license.
> It probably does make sense to call the system *as a whole* 
> a "MiNT" system, even if the kernel is (called) FreeMiNT 
> rather than MiNT.
> Eric

Basically, if I understand the above correctly:

1) MiNT is still a product whose copyright is yours.
2) using MiNT as the generic name for the OS is perfectly fine.
3) returning MiNT by uname is also possible.

Is this correct?

  Martin-Eric Racine * http://www.pp.fishpool.com/~q-funk/M-E/
  The Atari TT030 Homepage * http://members.tripod.com/~TT030/