Re: PHPNuke license
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:47:59PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 04:35:02PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > Consideration of the scenario of use of a modified but undistributed version
> > of a program within the modifying organisation would also lead one to
> > conclude that our interpretation of 2 as a whole is desirable, and likely
> > to be the intention of the license's author(s).
> Why does anyone care about modified copies that don't get distributed?
> Has it occurred to anyone how difficult it would be to enforce such a
> restriction? How is the copyright holder to know that such modification
> has even happened?
Consider the case where I modify gs (since that's the example I used earlier)
and deploy it around my company. It seems reasonable to require that I don't
remove the copyright notice and warranty disclaimer in the situation.
> I feel pretty strongly that no restrictions *at all* should attach to
> modification per se, but only to distribution of modifications.
Do you still feel the same way in the situation above, or were you just
focusing on your personal situation?
> What I do in the privacy of my own home is not any copyright holder's
> damn business.
Good grief, I'd hate to think... ;)
Nick Phillips -- email@example.com
Your boss climbed the corporate ladder, wrong by wrong.