Re: defining "distribution" (Re: A few more LPPL concerns)
> From: Jeff Licquia <email@example.com>
> Date: 21 Jul 2002 22:59:26 -0500
> It's crucial to your point, therefore, that there not be a distinction
> between running the program from /usr/local/bin or /afs/whatever/bin. I
> think we've shown that this isn't the case, since a sysadmin does not
> need to give source to every person with a login on his box, but does if
> he exports the program via AFS.
Exactly. I really do not see the difference between running a program
from /usr/local/bin or /afs/whatever/bin/. What is the difference
between AFS and NFS besides the technical one? My /usr/local/bin can
be NFS-exported to hundreds of computers. Even my box can have
hundreds logins there.
You cannot have legal definitions depending on technical details of
network protocols. If something is illegal to share through AFS, it is
still illegal to share through NFS, FTP or HTTP. Legal definitions
*may* depend only on some high-level details of the protocols, like
whether the protocol allows anonymous exchange etc.
If you contend that this sharing is illegal through AFS, then you need
to show me what features of AFS make it illegal and why they do not
apply to NFS or simple logging to a box. Otherwise your conclusion
will hold for these kinds of sharing too.
When you meet a master swordsman,
show him your sword.
When you meet a man who is not a poet,
do not show him your poem.
-- Rinzai, ninth century Zen master
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com