I wonder if sources with patched pov are supposed to be called 'standard POV
distribution'. I refer to sentence from comments in octree.cpp: "All standard
POV distribution rights granted. All other rights reserved." Dos it mean I can
redistribute octree.cpp with rest of patched files ? Sorry if the answer is
obvious but I don't know English language details and can't find note about
octree in povlegal.

ABX

Post a reply to this message

ABX wrote:

> I wonder if sources with patched pov are supposed to be called 'standard
> POV distribution'. I refer to sentence from comments in octree.cpp: "All
> standard POV distribution rights granted. All other rights reserved." Dos
> it mean I can redistribute octree.cpp with rest of patched files ? Sorry
> if the answer is obvious but I don't know English language details and
> can't find note about octree in povlegal.

I think that sentence should be read as
"All standard (POV distribution rights) granted", not
"All (standard POV) (distribution rights) granted".

That is, the same rules apply to octree.cpp as to any other source file.

This is just one example of the ambiguity in most natural languages. For 
example Lojban, an artificial language, actually has means to deal with 
this kind of ambiguous situations.

Post a reply to this message

In article <qrffsucrqdvmbb7knn55884pc23hblotsq@4ax.com> , ABX 
<abx### [at] abxartpl>  wrote:

> I wonder if sources with patched pov are supposed to be called 'standard POV
> distribution'. I refer to sentence from comments in octree.cpp: "All standard
> POV distribution rights granted. All other rights reserved." Dos it mean I can
> redistribute octree.cpp with rest of patched files ? Sorry if the answer is
> obvious but I don't know English language details and can't find note about
> octree in povlegal.

All files in POV-Ray are distributed under the terms of POVLEGAL.DOC and no
other terms unless explicitly noted.   You may have noticed that octree.cpp
contains the standard POV-Ray license header.

The sentence "All standard POV distribution rights granted." just means
POVLEGAL.DOC, nothing else:

You missed a very important word.  It does not say "'standard POV
distribution'", but "standard POV distribution rights", which - given the
English grammar - belongs together.  The sentence would not be grammatically
correct in any other way.

    Thorsten


PS: Apart from this, you should not be so paranoid and assume the POV-Team
will come after you and sue for billions of damages if you "violate" some
tiny little note in some obscure file.  The POV-Team is neither associated
with the BSA, nor Microsoft, nor Adobe or any other company which in the
past may have done so ;-)

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3dc7d168@news.povray.org> , Johannes Dahlstrom 
<sad### [at] tkukoulufi>  wrote:

> I think that sentence should be read as
> "All standard (POV distribution rights) granted", not
> "All (standard POV) (distribution rights) granted".
>
> That is, the same rules apply to octree.cpp as to any other source file.
>
> This is just one example of the ambiguity in most natural languages. For
> example Lojban, an artificial language, actually has means to deal with
> this kind of ambiguous situations.

Exactly.

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message