Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Thu Jan 24 11:37, John Halton wrote: > > It seems clear enough that the administrators of toad are > > "propagating" /bin/ls. And that "propagation" is one that "enables > > other parties to make or receive copies". Nor is this "mere > > interaction ... with no transfer of a copy" - *running* /bin/ls would > > fit this category, but making a copy of /bin/ls in your home directory > > is a different matter. > > > > So this would seem to be "conveying" within the meaning of GPL v.3, > > and thus will fall within clause 6 of GPL v.3, "Conveying Non-Source > > Forms". > > So, do we need to have the sources all installed on our shell hosts? or > a written offer good for three years to provide the source?
Perhaps a simple way to avoid this is to simply 'chmod g-r' the executables in question. With only execute permission a mortal user cannot copy the binary, so there's no propagation going on. If the system has a world-readable /usr/src with full sources, I would argue that satisfies any obligation to make source available. Arnoud -- Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/ Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
