On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Richard Fontana fontana@sharpeleven.org wrote:
- Many (most?) app stores distribute to locked-down platforms, where
user rights are restricted by means both legal and technical. This is an important issue, and at the current time an issue that often appears in the same places as app stores, but it is a different issue, and should be resolved independently. Or to put it another way: locked-down platforms can be locked down without an app store, and app stores can deliver to non-locked-down platforms. Given this, the license should take care, while solving the lockdown problem, not to accidentally draft restrictions that would prohibit someone from using an app-store-like approach to deliver code to a rights-respecting platform. Again, I think copyleft.next handles this the right way, divorcing the anti-lockdown text (Corresponding Source, part (ii)) from discussion of the delivery mechanism (elsewhere in Sec. 9).
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.
Luis