On 11/27/2012 10:46 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Richard Fontana fontana@sharpeleven.org wrote:
I don't think there is any anti-lockdown text as such. Maybe this needs to be clarified. Did I mistakenly merge a bkuhn patch? :-)
My understanding of the functional requirement of Sec. 9(ii) was that it required the *ability* to install, not merely a description of how it might be done:
"all scripts, instructions and information known to you necessary for a skilled developer to build, compile, generate, modify, install and run the Covered Work."
i.e., if the "skilled developer" cannot "install and run the Covered Work" (say, because of a lack of keys), then the Corresponding Source has not been supplied.
Right. This may have to be fixed ... I suppose what I must have had in mind was "install and run on the received device in some hypothetical world in which the device was not locked down", or "install and run on similar but non-locked-down devices".
Although I note that GPLv3 section 1 uses "install and run", so that's the origin of this phrasing. That is, "install and run" is part of the general definition of Corresponding Source in GPLv3 even for those cases that fall outside the 'Installation Information' requirements of the second half of section 6. That could simply mean that the GPLv3 definition can be improved upon, or it could mean that there isn't a real problem in using "install and run" language for a definition of Corresponding Source that does not necessarily imply a requirement to provide anti-anti-lockdown information.
- RF