open source and classified software

[plug@arcticmail.com]

Y'all bust me up.

> ...The GPL is no ordinary license.

And THEY are not ordinary by any measure.

THEY can do anything THEY want, AT WILL.



* On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 03:17:57PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Nov 13,  2:20pm, Michael Sheldon wrote:
> 
> > If it's classified, it certainly won't be a workstation owned by the
> > employee. Installing classified software onto a personal workstation would
> > almost certainly involve prison time.
> 
> I was referring to machines owned by the employer used by the employee
> on the employer's behalf.  If media is provided to the employee to
> install on such a machine, is that not a form of "distribution"?  Even
> if it is not, if some form of "distribution" occurred to make the
> software available to the employer, it seems to me that the employee
> is still a "third party" (see below) and as such is entitled to a copy
> of the software.
> 
> > Let's use a better example. If I mod EMACS, and loan you my computer for the
> > weekend, are you entitled to the source? 
> 
> I honestly don't know.  The GPL is no ordinary license.  Here is
> section 2b from the GPL which describes one of the conditions you
> must meet regarding modified works:
> 
>     b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
>     whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
>     part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>     parties under the terms of this License.
> 
> Under this clause, I might well be entitled to the source.  (Note the
> phrase "to all third parties".)  I think the answer to this question
> hinges on the meaning of the word "distribute".
> 
> Again, I would suggest getting legal advice to resolve these sorts of
> questions.
> 
> > This is the position employers are
> > generally in. The employee has no rights to the software, it's the employer
> > that is licensed. And, believe me, you should be happy about this.
> > Otherwise, if your employer was violating a software license for software
> > they had installed on your company-provided workstation, *you* could be held
> > responsible as the end-user.
> 
> I agree that this is the case for most licenses.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
> 
> Plug-discuss mailing list  -  Plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss