-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Gareth Hunt wrote: > I think this is what HJ found objectionable: > > "Google grants you a personal, non-transferable and non-exclusive right and > license to use the object code of its Software on a single computer limited > strictly to non-commercial use only by you; provided that you do not (and do > not allow any third party to) copy, modify, create a derivative work of, > reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any > source code, sell, assign, sublicense, grant a security interest in or > otherwise transfer any right in the Software. You agree not to modify the > Software in any manner or form, or to use modified versions of the Software, > including (without limitation) for the purpose of obtaining unauthorized > access to Google services. You agree not to access Google services by any > means other than through the interface that is provided by Google for use in > accessing Google services." > > > Given that Mozilla products are released under a MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license > (see http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/), are Google in breach of the licence in not > making the source for their extension(s) available? Or are extension > developers free to release code under any licence they please? > > I'm not a lawyer and cannot pretend to understand this stuff. Does anyone > have any insight? (Also, is this going off-topic for the list?) > > Cheers, > Gareth
Yes indeed. Especially this part of it: "reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any source code" In short: this is a serious 'hands off' for anyone obeying the law. /HJ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) iD8DBQFFGghJRrb6S73JMeYRAnaAAJkBdKbZ8I4h0I+sywa0SHJ5TjYCvACdEXty pJfeIi/OsuWKRmwUSCikBQo= =rYiV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Project_owners mailing list [email protected] http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
