"Introducing New LiveCode Licenses"

Dr. Hawkins dochawk at gmail.com
Wed Oct 30 11:52:54 EDT 2013


On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Richmond <richmondmathewson at gmail.com>wrote:

> On 10/30/2013 01:23 PM, FlexibleLearning.com wrote:
>
>> This is illegal.
>>
>
> So . . . if one of my pupils builds a stack with LC Community
> that s/he wants to turn into a code-protected standalone, and I run off
> standalones
> for them for whatever target platforms they have in mind, I am breaking
> 'the' law?
>

You would be violating your license with Livecode.

It would also be "conversion"  in a Common Law country, and I presume
actionable under other legal systems.  It could also be a criminal larceny.

You would also have violated Livecode's copyright when you handed over the
compiled version.


I have no intention of doing that, but, just to be awkward (again):
>
> 1. How would anyone find out whose licensed copy of Commercial was used to
> build the standalones?
>

Civil discovery; they sue the student who distributed it and a "Doe"
defendant, and the first batch of interrogatories asks for this
information, or at a deposition, or . . .


>
> 2. Who gets sued? The kid or me?
>

Both.

4. A teacher running off standalones for his/her pupils at no cost,
>
> and
>
> 5. A person running off standalones for other people for money (goods or
> services).
>
> Under US copyright law, the "no profit" isn't a defense, just a factor in
*how much* damages to award.


> Although, even in the first case, if those pupils started selling their
> standalones RunRev might
> get a bit miffed having missed out on the revenue they would have had had
> those pupils forked out for Commercial versions of LC.
>
-- 
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list