Re: Monta Vista software license terms

["James Buchanan" <jamesbuch@iprimus.com.au>]

>     1. Can MontaVista add separate terms to their purchase agreement
that
> forbid/discourage/impede publishing the source?

They can change their licence agreement, but this relates to the
entire licence (e.g. switch from GPL to proprietary licence, but only
if they authored the GPL'd code.)  I am not sure of the difference
between purchase agreement and licence.  Retrospectively
adding/amending an existing licence when it has already been issued
with customers is another thing - it probably depends on what a court
is willing to allow.  As far as I know, there is little to go on when
trying to figure out if something is legal or within their rights or
not as far as software licences go.

One thing is for sure.  The law provides for copyright protection and
no more.  If something is outside the scope of copyright protection
*and there is no contract* (and a licence is *not* a contract) then
those licence agreements are not enforcable at law.  This is why
Microsoft's licences are not enforcable in a court of law (at least in
Australia anyway, I am not sure if they have been tested in court in
America.)

>     2. What if MV mixes GPL and proprietary code in the directories
to make
> it difficult to post the GPL portion?

Then they must honour the GPL licence terms with respect to the GPL'd
code, and it is their responsibility to comply with this.

--
James


----- Original Message -----
From: "jeff millar" <wa1hco@adelphia.net>
To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: Monta Vista software license terms


> So...could some kind soul with the source simply post it somewhere?
> MontaVista doesn't have to provide it on their site.  But they can't
prevent
> anyone with a copy from posting it. I've got some hardware from an
old
> project running hardhat linux and would like to upgrade.
>
> They used to post it and it helped. I had a "frank exchange of
views" with
> the MontaVista marketing folks about their change in policy a while
back.
>
> Some questions about posting the source, though...
>     1. Can MontaVista add separate terms to their purchase agreement
that
> forbid/discourage/impede publishing the source?
>     2. What if MV mixes GPL and proprietary code in the directories
to make
> it difficult to post the GPL portion?
>
> jeff
>
> > >     dj> I'm told that the preview kits do include kernel source,
> > >     dj> although I haven't checked for myself in a couple of
months.
> > >
> > So that you got the binaries now could you check where their
written offer
> > is and post it to lkml?  Afterwards anyone on this list could ask
them
> > for their source (and at least I want to).
> >
> > Btw, what do people think of a regular list where anyone who got
such
> > an offer can post it so anyone else can get source aswell?
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/