Received: from SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU by po7.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id AA13689; Sat, 2 Dec 95 04:50:52 EST Received: from post-ofc03.srv.cis.pitt.edu by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA11283; Sat, 2 Dec 95 04:49:42 EST Received: from local (root@localhost) by post-ofc03.srv.cis.pitt.edu (8.7.1/cispo-2.0.1.1) ID for owner-kerberos@MIT.EDU; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:50:50 -0500 (EST) Received: via switchmail; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from post-ofc02.srv.cis.pitt.edu via qmail ID ; Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:49:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:49:00 -0500 (EST) From: Mailer-daemon (Postmaster, University of Pittsburgh) Subject: Returned mail: Mailbox consistently over quota To: owner-kerberos@MIT.EDU Message-Id: Organization: University of Pittsburgh Postal-Address: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 The following message from ``owner-kerberos@MIT.EDU'' could not be delivered to ``+dir-insert+/afs/pitt.edu/usr0/cljack/Mailbox@pitt.edu'' because: The destination user has consistently been over quota for at least 4 days (since 28 Nov 1995 at 4:48:23 EST), preventing mail from being delivered. Please consider alternate methods for contacting this person. The specific error message is: Can't write in dir /afs/pitt.edu/usr0/cljack/Mailbox: Disc quota exceeded. The undelivered message follows: ---------------- Received: from post-ofc02.srv.cis.pitt.edu via qmail ID ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 04:48:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from post-ofc03.srv.cis.pitt.edu via qmail ID ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 04:46:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from MIT.EDU (PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.69.0.28]) by post-ofc03.srv.cis.pitt.edu with SMTP (8.7.1/cispo-2.0.1.1) ID for ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 04:45:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from pad-thai.cam.ov.com by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA00701; Tue, 28 Nov 95 03:52:23 EST Received: by pad-thai.cam.ov.com (8.6.12/) id ; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 03:55:59 -0500 Received: from GATEWAY by pad-thai.cam.ov.com with netnews for kerberos-wrapper@cam.ov.com (kerberos@mit.edu) To: kerberos@MIT.EDU Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 08:30:27 GMT From: smr@dc.dk (Soren Roug) Message-Id: <49eh5p$pd7@news.uni-c.dk> Organization: Datacentralen a/s Sender: usenet@cam.ov.com References: <49225a$h12@news.uni-c.dk>, <494j9i$qkl@jik.datasrv.co.il> Subject: Re: Kerberized telnet for MS-Windows - get it here! jik@jik.datasrv.co.il (Jonathan Kamens) wrote: >In that case, it isn't public domain. >I realize that this isn't directly related to comp.protocols.kerberos, but I >think it's important to point out errors like this when they are made. >"Public domain" means NO copyright. NO conditions. NO rules. "You can do >with it whatever you want. You can sell it. You can call it your own >work. You can line the bottom of your bird cage with it." If it's controlled >by the MIT copyright, then it's not public domain. I was refering to the European semantics of the term Public Domain, in which you can't waive your "Moral rights", which basically means that the originator of a work has to be credited. I recently realized that it is different in the US. Eg. Since Laurel & Hardy created their works while working for a motion picture company, they did not retain any rights over the works, and thus can't oppose the colourisation of their films. In Europe it's different; One can't tamper with a work without the consent of the producer - and the original ownership of a work can't be transferred. This means that we as europeans can't publish the wintel program and take credit for it, even if MIT *had* put in Public Domain. Soren Roug ----------------