3 ms·
if he really wanted to take only open source code, he could have cleared it with his managers and his compliance officer, and they would have let him take stuff
by vasilipupkin 13y ago
if he really wanted to take only open source code, he could have cleared it with his managers and his compliance officer, and they would have let him take stuff that is clearly open source most likely.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago>if he really wanted to take only open source code, he could have cleared it with his managers and his compliance officer, and they would have let him take stuff that is clearly open source most likely. The VF story addressed that (page 4, near the bottom). According to Aleynikov, GS cared not a bit for the terms of the Open Source license and considered anything that ever made it into their systems as GS proprietary code.
- ig1 13y agoWith the vast majority of open source software licences (including the GPL) you're perfectly entitled to integrated it into your propriety code without releasing it if you're not distributing it externally. The only exception of any size is the Affero GPL but even that only applies if you use the code in an external customer facing service.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y agoI probably should have phrased that more carefully. GS appears to care little for Open Source principles.
- vasilipupkin 13y agoYep - but in this case it's also something that they would have made very clear upfront and made him sign a document to show that he had understood those terms