On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:49:06 GMT, f/fgeorge <ffgeorge@yourplace.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:24:33 GMT, Odysseus
<odysseus1479-at@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:

Not so, according to Berkeley; the SETI@home open-source software is 
under GPL--see the notices that came with the S@h app in your projects 
folder. You can't _distribute_ it without the source (or a link 
thereto), but if you obtained it legitimately there's no law or contract 
to stop you _using_ it. And no-one modifying such open-source code has 
the right to impose additional conditions on the licence.

BUT according to the discussion, Crunch3r modified it using a program
he had to purchase. The product of that program is now under its
license, not Berkeleys open source anymore.

1. crunch3r did not change any code. he was only using the intel
compiler and made different versions for different computers (sse sse2
sse3 etc). he stated in a german forum that he has no clue about
programming. using the best compiler was the only thing he does.

2. berkeley made a statement about this case and said that it is not
illegal to use this but without sourcecode it is illegal to distribute
it in the future (but the sourcecode is the same - no changes, so this
would be no problem)

3. the cheating issue is about his version 5.11. this has a wrong
factor and claimes to much credits and cruncher had 2 machines running
with this old version. a simple mistake i think because he didn't get
really more credits and if he wanted to cheat he wouldn't show his
clients.

regards