29 ms·
If you release the content to people who shouldn't have it, the next set will not be distributed to you. Your contract will not be renewed. https://archive.is/
by striking 10y ago
If you release the content to people who shouldn't have it, the next set will not be distributed to you. Your contract will not be renewed.
https://archive.is/qt0n2 https://archive.is/qt0n2
- techdragon 10y agoWait ... That's actually working? I had heaps of things I shitcanned as not even remotely profitable to do because all common sense told me that this exact tactic would not work.
- striking 10y agoYou can. It seems legal (tho IANAL) and it seems to be working in practice. Thing is, your distribution chain needs to be extremely tight (watermarked data or careful chain of trust) or else content will just get leaked every patch.
- cyphar 10y agoI'm fairly sure it's not legal, because you're acting in bad faith (while you haven't changed the License terms, you are effectively coercing people into not being able to take advantage of the license). I'd also consider the tactic immoral because you're adding restrictions to free (and copylefted) software.
- geofft 10y agoHow do they reconcile this with the statement on https://grsecurity.net/download.php https://grsecurity.net/download.php that the patches are under GPLv2 and distributors must ship the complete corresponding source? What happens if I redistribute grsecurity binary kernels with no other patches, and offer source as I am obligated to do?