🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <TwsXFB7w164w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) writes:
|> 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 distribution
later on (I'm assuming that "full source code" includes the comments in
the original source files mentioning the GPL -- if I removed all the
comments describing who the authors were, and pretend I wrote it and am
giving it away with no restrictions, then I'd think that even someone who
hates the copyleft would need to agree that I'm committing fraud).

You're getting tiresome, Mathew.  Come up with a new argument.

-- 
Joe Buck	jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu