[Gllug] Hypothetical GPL question

[jim]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Rev Simon Rumble wrote:
> On Mon 08 Oct, Paul Brazier made the following spurious claims:

I wouldn't say "spurious" exactly. Possibly a little far-fetched.

> If you really were writing in machine code, you really are a sick man
> and need help. :)

I've coded (very small programs!) in machine code directly without an
assembler before. (That doesn't necessarily mean that Paul isn't sick, of
course).

> > To a non-programmer, access to C source code would be just as helpful as
> > access to the "machine source code" i.e. the binary.
> 
> Not at all.  The GPL doesn't just protect programmers but anyone else
> too.  Even if you can't code yourself, you can pay/convince someone to
> do it for you if it's worth that much to you.  This is why, especially
> for businesses, basing your business on closed source code is a no-no.

Surely if it's really worth _that_ much to you you could find a really
good reverse engineer? It would cost one hell of a lot, of course, but if
your business really DOES depend on it it might be worth it. On the other
hand, even thinking about how a program might work while watching it in
action is legally dodgy at the moment.

jim
-- 
http://madeira.physiol.ucl.ac.uk/people/jim/
"... I naturally gravitated to London, that great cesspool into which all the
 loungers and idlers of the Empire are irresistibly drained."
                                - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, "A Study in Scarlet"


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug