[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: [OT] some weird GPL licensing questions
From:       Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira () kdemail ! net>
Date:       2004-02-13 22:19:26
Message-ID: 200402132019.41851.thiago.macieira () kdemail ! net
[Download RAW message or body]


Andreas Pour wrote:
>The point you miss, I think, is that a company cannot act in the real
> world.  It takes a human to do so.  This human has rights under the
> GPL the moment he receives a copy, which rights the company cannot
> take away.

I see your point. You understand that a "company" may not install a 
software without human intervention, without the transferral of the 
copyrighted material from one entity (the company) to another (the 
employee). Hence, it's impossible to not distribute the software when 
you want to deploy it.

However, given that a company has certain rights like those of a person, 
it's a matter of interpretation whether an employee can act on behalf 
of the company. My interpretation says it's possible. That way, there 
is no distribution, since the licensed software has never left the 
hands of the company.

>In this case, for sure the tech deparment employees received copies
> and the company cannot restrict them from further redistribution
> (i.e., outside the company).

I find that there's a difference between giving someone something (thus, 
requiring transferral of GPL rights) and the "lending" of something so 
that the employees can act on behalf of the company.

It's also possible that, to circumvent this kind of interpretation, a 
company just develop a deployment software, so that the original GPLed 
software can be installed without human intervention. And the 
developers are usually bound by contracts which state what they produce 
at the company, during working hours and using company's hardware is 
company's properties and copyrights.

These two are my arguments for believing what I said above of 
distributing != deploying. And it seems quite clear we are not going to 
reach a consensus here of what is legal interpretation.

Therefore, anyone who's interested in this kind of intra-company 
deployment should consult with their lawyers and their local 
legislation.

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  Registered Linux user #65028
   thiago (AT) macieira (DOT) info
    ICQ UIN: 1967141   PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]