Re: Dissident versus ASP

[Nick Phillips <nwp@nz.lemon-computing.com>]

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 12:49:21AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:

> This is the harder way of doing it, of course; the easiest way is to
> say that it's not the employees who own the copy of the program but the
> company, and that all the work the employees do is a "work for hire"
> and copyright is owned by the company; then there's no question of the
> employees being able to distribute copies -- they don't own the copy
> they have so they have no rights at all -- cf the various sourceless
> beta tests of GPLed software that people have gotten away with.

How about a clause that specifies that adds to the requirement to
supply source to anyone who gets a binary a clause that requires
supply of source under the GPL, with no further restrictions (such
as NDAs) to anyone who has access to it?

So anyone working on the code at any time can release it.


Cheers,


Nick

-- 
Nick Phillips -- nwp@lemon-computing.com
Accent on helpful side of your nature.  Drain the moat.