"" - If the app is open source, this definitely violates either the Apple store agreement or the LiveCode Community copyright license (GPLv3).
- If the app is closed-source, this definitely violates the LiveCode Indy end user license agreement and probably also the LiveCode Community copyright license. If you are doing this, stop doing so immediately and get *a Business license seat for each person involved in developing your app.* Apple's walled garden is not a fertile pasture for growing Free Software. If you want to make Free Software apps for mobile devices, target Android. Peter "" Dear Peter, for centuries, the legal community and professionals have exercised their intelligence to taylor strict legal rules to make them fit to reality. English law is the legal system which empowers most the judges to complement strict rules by case law. So that case is precisely a case that calls for some kind of interpretation of the strict rule. To do so lawyers tend to enquire on the profound objectives of the law and see to what extend the fundamental points of a rule have been or not "trespassed" if I may say so. THis is a process with which programmers may not be very prepared : for us a rule is a rule and, unless you program in fuzzy logic is yes or no. So it may be that your rather strict point of view could perhaps be watered down, as the straight answer you'r given to the case of these youngsters may not be in the interest of the communiity : that each should get a business license just because they participate to a few lines of code is a rather unfriendly and perhaps not so human position. And that kind of position can also have the effect of just frightening people around. Also, on the legal ground, what seems to matters for licenses so far that might little background in English and french law can help me is not who coded what at what time, but who is the official owner of the stuff. So If student A writes down some code on text wrangle and gives it to student B who (thanks folks) have an indy license, that belongs to student B and he can dispose of it as he wishes, open sourced or closed source. In that case it seems to me that it is just a case of confidence between the group of happy co-contributers, co-thinkers. --- I really think we should A) take great care to simplify as much as possible all the complex rules that govern tend to govern more and more very little tiny step we make, and B) to apply them with human intelligence and adaptability, as this is the essence of the law, as is taught in the british common law. We definitely need a license guide for humans. This will be difficult as thinking about it will raise some fundamental issues, but, that must be addressed, and hopefully by the community and livecode hand in hands. -- Dr Peter Brett <peter.brett@> LiveCode Technical Project Manager LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/ _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@.runrev Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/On-rev-support-problem-tp4706664p4706833.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
