Re: Updated License Term Agreement for VC Redistributable in VS 2008SP1

Discussion in 'Python' started by python@bdurham.com, Apr 14, 2010.

  1. Guest

    Alex,

    > I do not see anything about redistribution, only installation, unless I am missing something?


    I read "installation" to mean the same as "redistribution" in the
    context of this article. Perhaps I'm wrong?

    Malcolm


    On 4/14/10, <> wrote:
    > I just stumbled across the following page which seems to indicate that
    > the MS VC 2008 runtime files[1] required to distribute Python
    > applications compiled with Py2exe and similar tools can be shipped
    > without the license restriction many previously thought.
    >
    > See: Updated License Term Agreement for VC Redistributable in VS 2008
    > SP1
    > http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/KB956414
    >
    > <quote>
    > The End User License Agreement (EULA) attached to the English version of
    > Visual C++ (VC) Redistributable Package (VCRedistx86.exe,
    > VCRedistx64.exe, and VCRedist_ia64.exe) in Microsoft Visual Studio 2008
    > does not let you redistribute the VC Redist files. It specifies that you
    > may only install and use one copy of the software.
    >
    > ----> The correct EULA allows installation and use of any number of
    > copies of the VC Redist packages. <----
    >
    > CAUSE
    >
    > This problem occurs when Visual Studio 2008 SP1 installs incorrect VC
    > Redist files that have the wrong EULAs to the computer.
    > </quote>
    >
    > I know there's been lots of confusion about whether developers can ship
    > these DLL files directly or whether developers must ship the Visual C++
    > 2008 Redistributable Package SP 1 files (vcredist_x86.exe or
    > vcredist_x64.exe) - I think the above article should settle this debate
    > once and for all.
    >
    > Malcolm
    >
    > 1. MS VC 2008 runtime files: msvcr90.dll, msvcp90.dll, msvcm90.dll
    > --
    > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
    >



    --
    Have a great day,
    Alex (msg sent from GMail website)
    ; http://www.facebook.com/mehgcap
    --
    http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
     
    , Apr 14, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lie Ryan Guest

    On 04/15/10 06:38, wrote:
    > Alex,
    >
    >> I do not see anything about redistribution, only installation, unless I am missing something?

    >
    > I read "installation" to mean the same as "redistribution" in the
    > context of this article. Perhaps I'm wrong?
    >


    Does it makes sense to be able to install a library in other's computer,
    but not redistribute it? Hmm... I'll have to consult a lawyer.
     
    Lie Ryan, Apr 16, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    Lie,

    > Does it makes sense to be able to install a library in other's computer, but not redistribute it? Hmm... I'll have to consult a lawyer.


    See Tim Robert's response (I can't remember which Python mailing list)

    <quote>
    The license agreement change fixes a problem that was accidentally
    introduced by Visual Studio 2008 SP1. The redistributable package that
    can be downloaded directly from Microsoft (which you would use if you
    had the Express Edition) has the right license to begin with. It never
    had the restriction.

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235299.aspx

    Microsoft's intent is that you be able to distribute the non-debug
    runtimes with any applications built with Visual Studio. They are evil,
    but not arbitrarily malicious.
    </quote>

    Malcolm
     
    , Apr 16, 2010
    #3
  4. Lie Ryan Guest

    On 04/17/10 03:40, wrote:
    > Lie,
    >
    >> Does it makes sense to be able to install a library in other's computer, but not redistribute it? Hmm... I'll have to consult a lawyer.

    >
    > See Tim Robert's response (I can't remember which Python mailing list)
    >


    I was responding to Alex Hall's comment (and your subsequent reply)

    """
    wrote:
    > Alex Hall wrote:
    >> I do not see anything about redistribution, only
    >> installation, unless I am missing something?

    > I read "installation" to mean the same as "redistribution" in the
    > context of this article. Perhaps I'm wrong?

    """

    it appears to me *if* someone had written an EULA that allows
    installation on other machine but not redistributing it, they must be
    fairly insane (in this case, Microsoft isn't insane enough to write such
    EULA for their VC).
     
    Lie Ryan, Apr 16, 2010
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Juan T. Llibre
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    578
    S. Justin Gengo
    Oct 27, 2005
  2. Replies:
    16
    Views:
    1,237
    Jonathan N. Little
    Apr 3, 2006
  3. Volker Grabsch
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    766
    Michael Hudson
    Jul 25, 2005
  4. Darren Dale
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    330
    Darren Dale
    Jun 29, 2008
  5. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,053
Loading...

Share This Page