Re: SCC

From: Crispin Cowan (crispinat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 29 2002 - 16:31:05 PDT

  • Next message: bigsam: "Re: gcc trampoline?"

    Westerman, Mark wrote:
    
    >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?
    >
    On the other hand, if I contract Joe-Bob Haxor as a 1099 contractor 
    working in my shop slinging code, doing mods to GPL'd code, that is NOT 
    distribution, and I don't have to let the GPL'd code out of the building.
    
    The subtle point of interpretation is whether Secure Computing 
    Corporation can be considered an "employee" of the NSA.
    
    >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.
    >
    The point in question is what constitutes "distribution": giving GPL'd 
    code to an employee of an organization within that organization does not 
    constitute distribution, while selling GPL'd code to a 3rd party does. 
    The SCC/NSA situation appears to be in the twilight zone.
    
    Crispin
    
    -- 
    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX                      http://wirex.com/~crispin/
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 - 18:13:44 PDT