11 Apr
2004
11 Apr
'04
12:53 a.m.
Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 21:01, Simon Jenkins wrote:
Oh, erm... somewhere in here...
Marek Peteraj wrote:
I fail to see where, could you tell me? :)
Marek
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 19:42, Simon Jenkins wrote:
will(a)malefactor.org wrote:
It might be what you meant... but it flatly contradicts what you *said*.
>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.
"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.