On Thursday 14 March 2002 09:38 pm, Bruce Perens wrote: > From: David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > You don't have the APSL quite right. Clause 2.2d only applies to "Your > > Deployed Modifications." > > > > Clause 2.2d merely requires a prominent notice of the license for binary > > only deployments. It can only be triggered by the creation of a > > derivative work, since compilation is considered derivation. > > I prefer this to the proposed GPL change. A whole lot. Is there anything > I should know before I write Eben and Richard to tell them that?
Apropos a recent discussion here, I think it hinges upon whether or not the user has the right to create derivative works in private. 17 USC 117 *might* suggest that compiling the source code in order to run it on one's own computer is the right of the user, and not the author's privilege to restrict. -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org pgp public key on website -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
