So here is an interesting copyright question to ponder: are we allowed to redistribute binaries of open source software that have been compiled and signed by Apple?
-
-
But this will be an interesting one to ask the lawyers, if we find that doing things this way would let us enable new ways of installing Linux.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
you can't create this binary with only the sources though, you also need a code signing certificate which is not covered by an open source license
-
You can create the *binary* (as in the text section) with only the sources; only the binary code as in the processor opcodes and data is covered by copyright. Digital signatures and keys are not copyrightable AIUI.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
for some piece of software like Python specifically it may be more obvious as they print the license at runtime (Python: license() in the REPL) while I'd agree on it being a mechanical process, binary changes by new build system scripts (e.g. signing) might be less obviously so?
-
I'm not convinced that signing itself creates a derivative work (as attaching a digital signature does not change the actual copyrighted software, and I don't think numbers that aren't creative expression i.e. digital signatures are copyrightable? but IANAL)
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.