4 ms·
> Each of those sock-puppet accounts can request the source, so 5. No wait, it's still a single human being, so 1. Either way, it doesn't matter. They can reque
by colejohnson66 5y ago
> Each of those sock-puppet accounts can request the source, so 5. No wait, it's still a single human being, so 1. Either way, it doesn't matter. They can request the source, and they should get it.
The answer is complicated.
If I hack into a company and steal a binary for an internal tool (that uses GPL licensed stuff), I can’t demand the source code because I was not authorized to use said binary.
If its a beta not designed to be used by the public, it’s not clear how it will go. The users weren’t authorized to use it but it was easily accessible.
See also: the horrific CFAA Act
- kazinator 5y agoOK. Now, further, suppose you're the member of some copyleft outrage group and have heard that someone broke into a company and obtained an internal tool based on GPL-ed code. You jump up and down and scream that the person be given the source code in 30 days, or you will somehow terminate their license to use that code. Does that fit what we are looking at here?
- colejohnson66 5y agoFrom my outside view as a non-lawyer: probably