Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:5780 comp.mail.uucp:1036
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!hao!noao!mcdsun!mcdchg!heiby
From: heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Packet size & number of windows in UUCP
Message-ID: <4684@mcdchg.UUCP>
Date: 23 Feb 88 20:03:04 GMT
References: <567@acornrc.UUCP> <13668@pyramid.pyramid.com> <788@vixie.UUCP> <398@cogen.UUCP> <157@istop.ist.CO.UK> <15322@pyramid.pyramid.com>
Reply-To: heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby)
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer, Schaumburg, IL
Lines: 18

Carl S. Gutekunst (csg@pyramid.UUCP) writes:
> And any site that has
> a source license can compile it for a neighboring site that has only a binary
> license, and give them the binary.

I think that this should be checked before being acted upon.  Once upon a time,
I asked about doing just such a thing.  (It was even in the context of UUCP!)
The answer I got was that the source site must have a Binary Redistribution
Agreement (called "Customer Provisions", I believe, whatever that means) with
AT&T in order to distribute binaries derived from licensed software.  Not only
that, but said source site would be liable to AT&T for an additional binary
royalty, even if the recipient of the program already had a copy from a
different vendor and had already paid a binary royalty.

I haven't kept track of AT&T's licensing policies and am not a lawyer.
I'm just suggesting that you check before getting into trouble.
-- 
Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP	Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix
"Intel architectures build character."