Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Brett Cannon schrieb: > >> Did they say why they wanted to distribute bytecode files? I assume it >> is either for space considerations or they think it will help to protect >> their IP somehow. >> > > It's to protect the IP (i.e. for proprietary software). They are aware > of decompyle, but still consider byte-code only distribution of their > code necessary for protection.
It sounds like a trade secret issue. You have to take reasonable measures to protect trade secrets in order for them to be legally recognized as such. I wouldn't be surprised if compiling to bytecode counts. There are similar provisions in copyright due to the DMCA (which seems to require nothing stronger than, say, ROT26), but I don't think this is the right context for that. Space considerations shouldn't be much of an issue, since you can (and should in many cases) distribute your code in a ZIP file, and code compresses quite well. Can Python import modules from encrypted ZIP files? That'd be an interesting way to protect a trade secret, and probably safer (in the courts) than distributing bytecode. Neil _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
