On Monday, July 29, 2002 1:44 PM Valdis.Kletnieks wrote: >To re-quote Mark's original note: > >> SCC by accepting the Sole Source Contract from the NSA and performing >> the work by modifying Linux you accepted the terms of the GPL. Since >> Linux uses the GPL, SCC was required by LAW to accept the terms of the >> GPL. They modified Linux and distributed SELinux to the NSA. > > What Mark got wrong here is that the mods are almost certainly a "work for > hire" and SCC didn't "distribute" them - legally, SCC made > modifications to NSA's copy. > > Which leaves the situation as most of us understand it - NSA > is left wondering > whether *ITS* mods (as done by SCC) are encumbered and thus > not distributable. > > /Valdis > If I contract Company "X" to modify GPL code to include Company's "X" software patent. Company "X" must then accept the terms of the GPL in order to perform the work otherwise you could not do the work under the terms of the GPL. If Company "X" modify GPL code to include Company's "Y" patent then Company "X" is liable to Company "Y" for damages. Is SCC going to sue itself? In other word, if I hire you to rob a bank you still go to jail. As a "work for hire" you still must abide by all laws and licenses. Mark Westerman _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 12:12:54 PDT