Re: GPL and other licences

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sun, 2006-02-05 at 03:27 +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>    > If I give you a copy, it is distribution.  The whole concept of
>    > internal `use' is bogus.  I can claim that the whole world is
>    > internal for my use, and then simply refuse to release the source
>    > to anyone, since it is `internal use', if one would follow your
>    > thread.
> 
>    Yes, Alfred, but a company is _one_ entity. If that company gives a
>    copy to a worker for _his_ private use then that would be
>    distribution.
> 
> The world is one entity.

Not legally.

>    Sad, but not recognized as distribution. That's why you have to
>    "agree" with the common proprietary licenses. They add restrictions
>    like "you can only install on one computer, or else no license".
> 
> But according to David (and yourself?) the license does not apply in
> this entity, so such restrictions are not relevant.  This is simply
> not true.

Of course it's not true. What happens is that those licenses add
restrictions upon copyright. That's one of the reasons you have to
agree: they add restrictions on what you can do as if in a contract (and
thus many confuse copyright licenses with contracts, unfortunately).

Rui

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part