On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 18:18, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 14:56 -0500, Shane wrote:
> > Jan,
> >
> > Thank you for your comments. I should clarify from the perspective of
> > an independent software developer with no previous relationship to the
> > company issuing the NDA that may or may not be valid or legal...
>
> I don't think this arrangement violates the GPL as they have not
> distributed the software yet. It's a stretch to consider the internal
> distribution of the unfinished code, which is inherently necessary to
> develop software at all, as "distribution" in the GPL sense. It sounds
> like they are just trying to protect themselves during the development
> process.
>
> If you're worried about personally getting ripped off, they you need to
> talk to a lawyer. The NDA was certainly written by a lawyer, so you're
> almost certainly not qualified to interpret it.
>
Good point ;-)
Jan
Received on Thu Apr 7 04:15:08 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 07 2005 - 04:15:09 EEST