Hmm... I wish I had noticed the context of the statements below. I missed
the thread of this discussion.
I am puzzled why the GPL permits private (or in-house) distributions of
modifications to be kept private; the advantages seem to be outweighed by
the disadvantages. Doesn't this essentially keep a good deal of software
development secret or undisclosed?
Rod
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Stallman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 8:59 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Plan 9 license
>
>
> My understanding was that a legal entity can make private
> modifications to GPL software and is allowed to keep those
> modifications private,
>
> That is our interpretation. In other words, using a copy
> within the company is not distribution to others.
>
> So, since a corporation is allowed to make private changes, I don't
> see why they could not instruct their employees to keep those changes
> private to the company.
>
> I believe that they can.
>
