🚀 go-pugleaf

jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) writes:
> In article <TwsXFB7w164w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) 
> |> jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) writes:
> |> > If you write a program that uses GPL code, then sell someone a binary,
> |> > and then that person says to you: your program contains GPL'd code;
> |> > I'd like to obtain the source, and I'm willing to pay a reasonable
> |> > distribution fee -- the violation does not occur until you say NO,
> |> > I'm not giving you the source, or NO, you can't give the binary to
> |> > someone else.
> |> 
> |> False.  You can also violate the GPL by giving away your program with no
> |> restrictions whatsoever, with full source code supplied.
> 
> Wrong -- no violation takes place until someone tries to restrict distributio
> later on

No.  The GPL says that if I distribute a derivative work, that work must
be distributed under the GPL.  Otherwise I could get all the GNU software,
distribute it in a truly free way, and people could then grab those copies
and restrict them.


mathew

-- 
Hail Eris! / "Our whole economy's based on fear and death; how long can we get
away with this?" --- Jello Biafra / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! /
PGP RSA public key available on request / Desperately seeking Negativland's U2
CD / Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices