4 ms·

Wanted to see redistribution rules, and was surprised to see there is no license anywhere for the binaries... The closest thing I found is "copyright" file insi

by theamk 6y ago

Wanted to see redistribution rules, and was surprised to see there is no license anywhere for the binaries... The closest thing I found is "copyright" file inside .deb: Copyright: 2020 The Pyston Team <support@pyston.org> License: Closed source, all rights reserved. I guess it means no one should be touching the file, as they haven't even granted access to run it.

bastawhiz 6y ago
From the link: > Our plan is to open-source the code in the future, but since compiler projects are expensive and we no longer have benevolent corporate sponsorship, it is currently closed-source while we iron out our business model.
globular-toast 6y ago
> I guess it means no one should be touching the file, as they haven't even granted access to run it. Since when does someone need to explicitly grant you permission to run a program on your own computer?
- theamk 6y ago
  Running is probably ok, but giving to others? I am not sure. Those limitations existed since before the computer time, when the copyright law was passed. For example, even you own a book, there are certain things you can not do, like duplicate it and sell copies. In case of software, here is how the law works [0] > When you make a creative work (which includes code), the work is under exclusive copyright by default. Unless you include a license that specifies otherwise, nobody else can copy, distribute, or modify your work without being at risk of take-downs, shake-downs, or litigation. There are "fair use" terms, which allow some things without permissions -- but things like "copying the binary to company-internal repo so CI runners can pick it" really need explicit permissions if you want to be above the board. [0] https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/ https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
  - globular-toast 6y ago
    Yeah, you won't be able to distribute it, but running it should be fine (unless you want to consider copying it from disk to memory as copying, of course).

by theamk 6y ago

bastawhiz 6y ago

From the link: > Our plan is to open-source the code in the future, but since compiler projects are expensive and we no longer have benevolent corporate sponsorship, it is currently closed-source while we iron out our business model.

globular-toast 6y ago

> I guess it means no one should be touching the file, as they haven't even granted access to run it. Since when does someone need to explicitly grant you permission to run a program on your own computer?

theamk 6y ago
Running is probably ok, but giving to others? I am not sure. Those limitations existed since before the computer time, when the copyright law was passed. For example, even you own a book, there are certain things you can not do, like duplicate it and sell copies. In case of software, here is how the law works [0] > When you make a creative work (which includes code), the work is under exclusive copyright by default. Unless you include a license that specifies otherwise, nobody else can copy, distribute, or modify your work without being at risk of take-downs, shake-downs, or litigation. There are "fair use" terms, which allow some things without permissions -- but things like "copying the binary to company-internal repo so CI runners can pick it" really need explicit permissions if you want to be above the board. [0] https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/ https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
- globular-toast 6y ago
  Yeah, you won't be able to distribute it, but running it should be fine (unless you want to consider copying it from disk to memory as copying, of course).