---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Bruce Perens <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:41 PM Subject: Re: Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL) To: Lawrence Rosen <[email protected]> Cc: Legal Network <[email protected]>, John Cowan <[email protected]>, Lawrence Rosen <[email protected]>
As far as I can tell, CCS (Complete and Corresponding Source code, the nomenclature used by SFC in enforcement) depends on the terms of the license rather than being something the community can define for all licenses. The FSF definition appears to be all that you need to build, install, and run the program as it is intended to be run by the provider of the binary, with all device capabilities enabled (if this is an embedded device). This thus can include a cryptographic key, although SFC seems to have acknowledged that key and device capability requirements can be enforced for if GPL3 is involved, and not GPL2.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
