that depends on who you talk to.  under the fair use doctrine you would
be allowed to have as many copies as you wanted as long as you never ran
more than one copy at a time and had the original media somewhere.  of
course the software companies feel differently, or at lest their lawyers
do.  i'm not aware of it being enforced any where though i suspect
they've tried and occasionally won (that's the wonderful thing about the
court system, sometimes something is wrong sometimes it isn't for no
apparent reason).  any one know of any law relating to binding some one
to a contract just because they open an envelope they don't even sign?=20
how about their employees who are just handed the disk to reinstall and
haven't seen the envelope?  it's one of those areas where a clear law
would be nice, but i suspect that corporate lawyers are aware of the
fact they will make more money if it stays unresolved or at least some
what unresolved.  it certainly doesn't violate the spirit of the copy
right laws.

"T.C. Phelps" wrote:
>=20
-------.
> Guess the only problem with this is that having a full
> set of the development tools on CVS might cause a few
> problems with copyrights...
------------

--=20
Philip Stortz--"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I
didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.=20
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
Jew.=20
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I
wasn't a trade unionist.=20
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a
Protestant.=20
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-- Martin Niem=F6ller, 1892-1984 (German Lutheran Pastor), on the Nazi
Holocaust, Congressional Record 14th October 1968 p31636.

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist