Re: Squeak in Debian?
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Squeak in Debian?
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 08:09:24 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] c7d9t8$li4$2@sea.gmane.org>
- References: <1082635881.2448.175.camel@atari.stigge.org> <20040428141740.GU716@finlandia.infodrom.north.de> <873c6onlrw.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> <E1BIwdZ-00037n-00@logrus.dnsalias.net> <20040430082314.GA5470@jbj2.jbj.homelinux.com>
Jakob Bohm wrote:
<snip>
> The term "under your direct control" typically does not refer to
> physical access or knowledge of the root password etc., it
> usually refers to "under your [licensee as legal entity] direct
> [legal] control", that is any computer that the licensee (which
> may be a person, company, organisation etc.) has the *legal*
> command over, typically by owning, renting, leasing, borrowing,
> getting as sponsorship etc.
Thanks for that clarification. That cleans up that problem. :-)
*happy happy joy joy*
>
> So if a DD is working with weak guest privileges on a remote
> computer, the use of which has been donated as a sponsorship to
> SPI, and the software is licensed to SPI (not the DD), then SPI
> may do the things in the clause without that being an act of
> distribution, and SPI may use the DD as a tool to do that work.
>
> In contrast if the software is licensed to the DD as a person
> and the computer was not donated to the DD as a person, then
> this clause does not apply to anything the DD does on that
> computer, even if the DD is standing in front of the computer
> logged in as root and with full access to every part of the
> opened up computer cabinet. But it would apply to something
> that the DDs friend is doing for the DD on DDs laptop, even if
> the DD has no physical or network access to the laptop during
> the exercise.
>
> Just my 2c
>
> Jakob
>
--
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Reply to: