search for: lawyer

Hello, Have you guys noticed that conditional validation with validates_associated does not work well when you are creating a new record? Consider this gist: https://gist.github.com/aflag/4780225 The Lawyer class has validates_associated on address conditioned on whether the Lawyer data comes from a known source or not. So, if lawyer.source equals to some string, then lawyer.address must not be validated. However, if I''m trying to create a new record, it is validated regardless of whether...

...files#public", :as => :public_profile, :constraints => PublicProfileConstraint Here is the log: Started GET "/gregory" for 127.0.0.1 at 2012-03-05 12:44:43 -0800 Processing by ProfilesController#public as HTML Parameters: {"token"=>"gregory"} Lawyer Load (0.2ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "lawyers" WHERE "users"."id" = ? LIMIT 1 [["id", 1]] Lawyer Load (0.3ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "lawyers" WHERE "users"."token" = ''gregorymarcilhacy'' LI...

...asking for > interpretation of legal documents... > If you really really need to know the answer to questions like these, > the best bet is to hire legal council. Chris is right. I would add that it sounds like you are already getting nonsense responses. However, when you look for a lawyer, look for one who has dealt with GPL before. It is a very different type of license than most, and the majority of IP lawyers today remain unfamiliar with it. Further, a lawyer's training is to maximize the interests of their clients, not the interests of a community. This can lead to misunders...

...nce upon a time, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> said: > Note that it is without doubt that ZFS was not derived from the Linux kernel > and thus cannot be a derived work. All that matters for CentOS is: 1: Red Hat doesn't ship ZFS because of Red Hat's lawyers' interpretation of GPL+CDDL 2: Arguing about it here will not change #1 3: CentOS ships a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux and so won't have things that Red Hat's lawyers don't approve (see #2) Please let it go. I think everybody here knows your opinion. -- Chris Adams &l...

Hello, I am able to install Family Lawyer 2001 using wine, but when I run the application, all I can see is the logo in the top-lefthand corner of the window. Has anyone had any luck with this software? I really don't want to have to install windows. Even vmware is a pain for me. Any suggestions will be appreciated Thanks -- Justi...

...iolation of the community's > social standard." Daniel claimed it was not different, even though he proposed the text. I think it is better, as "egregious" (even though it is qualitative) helps identify what "rare" circumstances would come under the policy. As a non-lawyer I do think it's different. Yes I would be happier with that added, although it might not be enough for everyone who is unhappy with the code as-is. Thanks, --paulr > > If so, than I'd hope we could get this through and start discussing > the second part, the reporting and commit...

...gt; What do you believe that explains that the older version did not? No matter how you write it, it will not precisely define the conduct that will or will not get you kicked out. > > > | But it's not, in practice, any different. > > I concede it's not any different to a lawyer, which I know you are; most > of us are not lawyers. > That's not really relevant of course - i meant that it's not any different in practice than any other set of social conduct rules one is subject to. I doubt, for example, either the Google or Sony employee handbooks have precise...

...; > At least under German law, there is a clear separation between what I do > during work time and outside. Ignoring questions like anti competition > issues, my employer has no claims to what I do outside work time. Again, this is a common misconception, or so multiple german employment lawyers have told me. > That > leaves the part of "contributing on behalf of their company". > > > > Both actual (They told me i could contribute), agent (I am also actually > > authorized to contribute anyway), and apparent authority (Everyone else > in > >...

...un 01, 2015 at 10:55:55AM -0500, Jason Warr wrote: > I think that you need to simplify #1 to: > > 1: Red Hat doesn't ship ZFS > > As that is really all that matters and so that people can't argue that you > are making a statement of knowledge about what/why Red Hat's lawyers have > decided. It does not matter on these lists WHY they don't ship it, just > that they don't. According to https://access.redhat.com/solutions/79633 : > Root Cause > ZFS is not included in the upstream Linux kernel. Red Hat applies an > "upstream first" pol...

...some with some other application that links to the LLVM runtime libraries that are dual licensed. >>> Thanks for your response. Is this ability to distribute binaries without notices based on your personal assertion that the MIT license used does not require them? >> Yes. I am not a lawyer and am not giving legal advice. This is based on my understanding of the MIT license. > > OK, thanks. That's contradictory to the actual conditions written in the license, and as such the dual-licensing does not serve that purpose. Could http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#license...

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> wrote: > > Looking through the gcc testsuite turned up an interesting edge case. Let's > assume our target leaves a hole for alignment in struct x, as do x86 and > powerpc. Do you think the following code can validly abort? > > > struct x { char c; short s; }; > int i; char *p; >

On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:42 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > Looking through the gcc testsuite turned up an interesting edge > case. Let's assume our target leaves a hole for alignment in struct > x, as do x86 and powerpc. Do you think the following code can > validly abort? No. The value of the object referred to be the left hand side must be replaced by the object on the

On Mar 12, 2008, at 12:49 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > No. Doh, you know, I was trying to find the quoted wording... What the big print giveth, the small print takes away. Ignore me... I was wrong.

...org. A search for "opencall" on Google back then returned only references to theatrical agents. opencall.com and opencll.net were theatrical sites. Now a search for "opencall" on Google returns thousands of hits for HP's stuff, and I have dropped to number 3 :-) HP's lawyers have contacted me about the conflict. They say HP has OpenCall trademarked in lots of places, which seems strange for such a generic name. I have no wish to be associated with the HP stuff, so I registered a new name. At the same time, I also registered spandsp.org, so that name works too. Re...

...ang, or some with some other application that links to the LLVM runtime libraries that are dual licensed. >> Thanks for your response. Is this ability to distribute binaries without notices based on your personal assertion that the MIT license used does not require them? > Yes. I am not a lawyer and am not giving legal advice. This is based on my understanding of the MIT license. OK, thanks. That's contradictory to the actual conditions written in the license, and as such the dual-licensing does not serve that purpose. Could http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#license be upda...

...this comes down to whether you prove the above if push comes > to shove. GPL talks about the headers and where are all the places > you *should* put the copyright notices and license information. But > I think it comes to the "should" and since it is written "to make > lawyers more confident" about 30 years ago it might've kept some of > the reservations from that era. > > Finally the question: How much of a problem would it be if we just > limited the information in file headers to minimum and pointed > people to git history and central license?...

On 15.10.2008, at 14.01, Pertti Kellomäki wrote: > Tatu Vaajalahti wrote: >> With this program llvm-gcc -O2 optimizes test2 away even though it's >> address is taken in program (gcc-4.2 does not, neither does llvm-gcc >> with -O or -O0): >> >> >> #include <stdio.h> >> >> static const char test1 = 'x'; >> static const char

On Mar 11, 2008, at 10:52 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: >> I think the test case is bogus in terms of language correctness, > > Why? My gut. I listen to my gut. More seriously, C99 section 6.2.6.1 paragraph 6 has: > When a value is stored in an object of structure or union type, > including in a member > object, the bytes of the object representation that correspond to

Unfortunately, our lawyers say that they can't give legal advice in this context. My question would be, what are people looking for that the MIT or 2-clause BSD license don't provide? They're short, clear, widely accepted and very permissive. Another possibility might be to dual-license packages with both an...

Dear Samba team, We have developed cross-platform multiprotocol intranet file searcher and it includes the module (SMB scanner for *nix) which uses libsmbclient to enumerate all files on smb shares ("uses" means including headers and linking with library). Other modules also use some external libraries, but all other libraries have LGPL license. We prefer to publish our