| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The return of the Stanford CheckerThe return of the Stanford CheckerPosted Jun 13, 2002 7:19 UTC (Thu) by jbeyer (guest, #901)Parent article: The return of the Stanford Checker
Dawson Engler seems to be a nice guy. He answers mail, but he Has the FSF contacted him to get a release? Joerg
(Log in to post comments)
The return of the Stanford Checker Posted Jun 13, 2002 7:53 UTC (Thu) by DeletedUser1717 ((unknown), #1717) [Link] Even assuming that it is derived from a GPL source, as the Checker has never been distributed (it is only used internally at Stanford) there is no requirement to release any source for it.
The return of the Stanford Checker Posted Jun 13, 2002 11:23 UTC (Thu) by jbeyer (guest, #901) [Link] is giving the checker to a student a distribution?dont get me wrong I would not press on anybody and I sure dont
The return of the Stanford Checker Posted Jun 13, 2002 14:21 UTC (Thu) by gleef (guest, #1004) [Link] jbeyer asks: Giving a student binaries or source code to install on their on system (or in their directory on the Stanford systems) would be a distribution. Merely permitting the students to run the version already installed by the authors is not. I don't know how the Checker project operates. Even if they are distributing to students, if they excercise distribution option 'a' under GPL term 3, they may package the source together with the binaries on the same medium, and have no further obligation to distribute the source. They can't prevent the hypothetical students from redistributing the software, but nobody can force the students to, either. I am not a lawyer; the above should not be construed as legal advice.
|
|
||||||||||||