Re: BK kernel workflow

Kyle Moffett
2004-10-31T02:37:55Z

On Oct 30, 2004, at 19:35, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Indeed. Kyle's comments were clearly without basis in fact. Saying
> that you aren't bound by the terms of the license because you didn't
> download the code, your co-worker did, is no different than saying
> "hey,
> look at this! A copy of the Linux kernel! Now how did that get here?
> Well, I didn't put it here so I think I'll ignore the terms of the
> GPL."

The critical difference with the GPL is that it doesn't _add_
restrictions.
Without the GPL you may use the code however you want as long as
you don't distribute. With the GPL, you may use the code however you
want internally, and you can distribute provided you follow some rules.
The GPL is your only license to distribute at all, so if you want to do
so
you must follow its _distribution_ restrictions.

Besides, I never said anything about one user taking a copy another
user downloaded. Here is what I said:

> If someone else in the company I work for obtains BK, or if the company
> itself obtains and uses BK, I am _not_ bound by their decisions,
> because
> I am a separate entity, and I did not agree to said terms (Assuming
> that
> this does not conflict with an employment contract). Therefore you
> can't
> assume association through business.

This means that if my coworker downloads and uses the software I am in
no way bound by _his_ agreeing to the license. If I illegally obtain a
copy from him (IE: stealing from his HDD) then that's another issue.
But
he can agree to _no_ license that limits my individual rights (Unless I
signed some draconian employment contract that lets my boss do that).

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a17 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$
L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+
PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ r
!y?(-)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------