On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 12:02:06PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:15:13PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > > > > Consider Frank the lawyer who takes some nice source code from a GPLed > > > > project, and adds some code his friend was telling him under NDA. He > > > > puts it up on the web, and suddenly gets demands for source code from > > > > the original author. What does he do, violate the NDA, or the copyright > > > > license??? What does he do?!? > > > The GPL doesn't have such a rule. > > He puts the program up on the web. As in http://www.frankcorp.com/foo.exe. > > People then download it. They then demand the source. > Why does he put it on the web? *THAT* was already violating the NDA.
Lots of people distribute binaries that encode NDAed technologies. Windows, etc. Maybe it was a special case of some clever new advance in AI that looks for flaws in contracts, and he only gives away copies to his clients after getting $50 via paypal, which he splits 50:50 with his friend. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
pgpggiazA1HnJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
