🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Kt2h4.21$XS6.411@burlma1-snr2>,
Barry Margolin  <barmar@bbnplanet.com> wrote:
>In article <86244d$8s0$1@rrw1000.sel.cam.ac.uk>,
>Richard Watts <rrw1000@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>If someone is under NDA that would prohibit them from
>>>further redistributing any software they receive from you, you are
>>>prohibited from distributing GPLed software to them in the first place. If
>>>you do so anyway, you're violating the GPL.
>>
>> Erm, how ? If you're barred from redistributing gcc (for example), and
>>I distribute it to you, in what way am I violating the GPL ? I'm not 
>>restricting your rights at all. In fact, as long as there's no intent
>>to induce a breach of the GPL, I'm not convinced there's any liability
>>at all here.
>
>The GPL requires you to license me to redistribute GCC if you redistribute
>GCC to me.  If you make me sign an NDA prohibiting me from redistributing
>anything you give me (including GCC), you're not violating that clause of
>the GPL.

 Absolutely, provided it's me who makes you sign the NDA. If Sony
make you sign an NDA saying you won't redistribute copies of gcc,
and I then give you a copy of gcc, I don't see that I'm liable (or
that Sony is, for that matter).

[snip]
>If the NDA makes an exception for software whose license specifies
>different licensing, such as the GPL, then you would be OK.

 True.
 
 
Richard.
-- 
Principles are things that everyone thinks everyone else should have.