Re: Squeak in Debian?

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.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.