[linux-audio-dev] [OT] Linux, audio and the breach of GPL

Simon Jenkins sjenkins at blueyonder.co.uk
Sun Apr 11 03:53:53 UTC 2004

Marek Peteraj wrote:

>On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 21:01, Simon Jenkins wrote:
>>Marek Peteraj wrote:
>>>On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 19:42, Simon Jenkins wrote:
>>> will at malefactor.org wrote:
>>>>>IANAL, but I'm 99% sure that when you give someone a GPLd executable, 
>>>>>you're only obligated to provide that one person with the sources, not the 
>>>>>"general public" (read: everyone on earth).
>>>>True. Just that one person.
>>>That's what i meant by describing the extent to which the 'general
>>>public' rule applies.
>>It might be what you meant... but it flatly contradicts what you *said*.
>I fail to see where, could you tell me? :)
Oh, erm... somewhere in here...

>"For example, you may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a
>copy, in which case you'd normally restrict access to those who pay. In
>that case you're obliged to put a general public notice that _any_ third
>party, which intends to pay a fee, will do so  for the physical act of
>transferring a copy of GPLed software, which is being distributed in
>form of machine readable source-code or as an object or executable form."
[ _underlining_ yours]

..."obliged to put a general public notice"...???  I don't think so: If 
I give source
code to those who pay then I'm done, finished, obligations discharged. 
If I give
them a written offer of source code instead then _some_ third parties 
may also
be entitled to the written offer: But even then its *not my 
responsibility to make
them aware of the offer*! Its the re-distributors obligation to pass 
along my
written offer, if that's what they received from me. All I've got to do 
is honour
it if someone (/to whom it was passed along/) takes it up.

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list