IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Software Licensing Forum / Shouldn't matter.
Post #199,141
by admin
Picture of admin
3/16/05 10:59:53 PM
Reply
New Shouldn't matter.
If you give a copy of the code to someone, they can distribute it AFAIK.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #199,160
by imric
3/17/05 7:10:21 AM
Reply
New If you _give_ the contractor the code, maybe.
If they are working on it in-house, I think not. You can't give out the binaries without the source, though. If they get a copy of their own, well, you've distributed it. I wouldn't think t applies if the STOLE a copy of the in-house work.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
]
Imric's Tips for Living
  • Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
  • Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
  • Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.


Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
 
 
     FUD FUD FUD FUD - (drewk) - (19) - March 16, 2005, 10:33:59 PM EST
         The first bit is right. - (admin) - (17) - March 16, 2005, 10:38:52 PM EST
             Really? - (drewk) - (15) - March 16, 2005, 10:41:41 PM EST
                 Shouldn't matter. - (admin) - (1) - March 16, 2005, 10:59:53 PM EST
                     If you _give_ the contractor the code, maybe. - (imric) - March 17, 2005, 07:10:21 AM EST
                 The right definition of distribute is set by copyright law - (ben_tilly) - (12) - March 17, 2005, 11:05:32 AM EST
                     Yes it would - (jake123) - (11) - March 17, 2005, 05:29:22 PM EST
                         Doesn't GPL prohibit additional terms? - (drewk) - (8) - March 17, 2005, 05:48:05 PM EST
                             This is a FAQ. - (Another Scott) - (7) - March 17, 2005, 06:03:41 PM EST
                                 Note that this disagrees with Jake's understanding above. -NT - (ben_tilly) - March 17, 2005, 06:18:23 PM EST
                                 That contradicts what Jake said - (drewk) - (5) - March 17, 2005, 06:22:38 PM EST
                                     Various corrections - (ben_tilly) - (4) - March 17, 2005, 06:58:58 PM EST
                                         So do you agree with Scott's assessment? - (drewk) - (3) - March 17, 2005, 09:14:59 PM EST
                                             Yes. Mostly. - (ben_tilly) - (2) - March 17, 2005, 10:26:48 PM EST
                                                 In that case, you're being compelled - (drewk) - (1) - March 17, 2005, 10:35:25 PM EST
                                                     That's the idea - but how far does that go? - (ben_tilly) - March 17, 2005, 10:45:18 PM EST
                         You didn't do your research very well? - (ben_tilly) - (1) - March 17, 2005, 06:16:35 PM EST
                             Okay, so we use the Copyright definition of distribute - (drewk) - March 17, 2005, 06:24:11 PM EST
             what about an IP statement that all contractors sign - (boxley) - March 17, 2005, 07:46:40 AM EST
         I think it's half right - (Arkadiy) - March 17, 2005, 09:19:14 AM EST

Not such a bad thing, to be farmed by rats...
71 ms