On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:05:35 -0500, amicus_curious wrote: > "Thufir Hawat" <[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected]... >> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:26:56 -0500, amicus_curious wrote: >> >> >> Does the binary file which is being distributed reside on the verizon >> server? If so, then Verizon would be required to make the source >> available upon request from a customer. If the binary isn't on a >> Verizon server then Verizon has no obligations is the argument. >> >> The fact that there's a link on verizon.com which causes this binary to >> download doesn't prove that the binary file is on a Verizon server. >> > Well, the link resolves to downloads.verizon.net and that is most > certainly a Verizon site. Verizon does not need to make any source > available at least in regard to the BusyBox library, and indeed does not > do so, since the case filed by the SFLC complaining of that practice was > dismissed with predjudice. > > Try the link yourself.
None of the above demonstrate that the file(s) are stored on Verizon servers, the files could be hosted on Actiontek servers. -Thufir _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
