Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi André,

2011/7/13 André Schnabel <>:
I fully agree with Italo here. The discussion here at the list (and even you
comment right now) is focused on the legal implications and what the SC
would think of it. Your wording for the agenda item is much broader and
requests a general decision on the screenshots independent from possible
legal implications.

I've actually worded the issue into the real questions coming to the
fore from past discussions. The motion is clear and could be resolved
easily and unambiguously.

For agenda item 2: a very basic rule for questions to the SC should be that
the question should be crystal clear and not be changed half a day before
the SC's decision. At the moment I don't even know anymore what the actual
question is.

The real question is basically what I've submitted as the motion for
discussion. And it does reflect the two choices that seem to have been
voiced in past ML threads.

I'm perplexed. ;-)

David Nelson

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.