On Jun 28, 2007, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jun 28, 2007, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So, let's narrow the scenario to: tivoized machine downloads binary >> from protected site, refrains from downloading sources that it could >> download, user can still access and copy the binaries, but can't >> obtain the sources because the machine opted not to get them.
>> Now, the user can't distribute the binaries, because doing so without >> being able to get the sources to pass them on would be copyright >> infringement. Would a court see this as a restriction on distribution >> imposed by the distributor? Or by the copyright holder? > I'm not sure my point was clear (not even to myself), so let me try to > clarify with a slightly different scenario. http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/2007-07-01-gplv3-tivo-and-linux.en -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org} - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
