On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 22:40, Boris Veytsman wrote: > > From: Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 21 Jul 2002 20:34:32 -0500 > > > You're right, and there may be software you can't install on your AFS > > drive in this instance, because you're "distributing" software to those > > thousand computers. This is irrespective of whether any of those > > thousand computers actually execute the software or not. > > > > This could even apply if you have a license to the software; it may be > > OK to install the software in /usr/local/bin, but not in > > /afs/campus/foobar/bin. > > > > For GPL software, you just have to make sure that any of the > > thousand-or-so computer owners can get to the source for those > > programs. The easiest way to do that would be to export the source > > trees via AFS; they could also stick a written offer in their student > > handbook, or whatever. > > > > Exactly. If you are installing GPL'ed software in this manner, you > must satisfy the distribution conditions of GPL. In the same manner > you must obey distribution conditions of TeX and LaTeX. > > My point is, LPPL or Knuth's license is no more restrictive *in this > respect* than a meaningful interpretatation of GPL.
Your original point, way back in the thread, was: > I think that a sysadmin that put > a changed copy of latex.fmt in the $TEXFORMATS directory to be used by > his users, *distributes* a changed LaTeX. You think he does not; the > problem with your theory is that it undermines both the intentions of > LPPL AND GPL. The problem with this is that the GPL disagrees: > Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not > covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of > running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program > is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the > Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). It's crucial to your point, therefore, that there not be a distinction between running the program from /usr/local/bin or /afs/whatever/bin. I think we've shown that this isn't the case, since a sysadmin does not need to give source to every person with a login on his box, but does if he exports the program via AFS. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]