-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Alfred M\. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The employer cannot say that I am not allowed to do so, since that >would violate the license.
The employer may not legally redistribute *and* then also require the recipients to do foo and bar and not to do x and y. But: it doesn't seem entirely clear that an employer giving an employee a CD with which to do some work is, in fact, redistributing. I the work is to be done on machines owned by the employer, I suppose that is definitely *not* redistribution. OTOH if the work is to be done on the employee's own machine, I wonder if that might require a pro forma redistribution (into RAM) of an incidental copy, in which case the employee *would* be redistributing (to hirself) *as an agent* of hir employer. Once sie has that copy, sie can do as sie pleases since the employer has no right to impose further restrictions. Or maybe not (IANAL). - -- Q: Why does this scheme have so many keys? A: We added them as the need arose. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Please fetch my new key 804177F8 from hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net/ iD8DBQFD8aKQwyMv24BBd/gRAv6GAKCGhOzserrYVMcYkm1+mw5/IMNCTwCfRHiA qsIEmYCJsg6KEiDg7GnvpKQ= =e9P0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
