As it happens, some of the surveilance tools out there are made by Erik
Andersen, who was for a time a Busybox developer and has been the main
plaintiff represented by the Conservancy. As far as I am aware, the
surveilance tools use Busybox. If any of his customers demand source
code, I'm sure he knows what to do. As for the rest of us, I doubt we'll
ever be informed.
Thanks
Bruce
On 8/29/2013 2:34 AM, ilf wrote:
Bradley M. Kuhn:
If someone used GPL'd software to build some software the government
wanted, and distributed it to them, the only reason it'd be a GPL
violation would be if, upon distribution to the government, there was
a violation.
But if a .gov entity gets a binary, and it know there's GPL code in
there, it also needs to get the source, right?
