On 22/11/2010 2:12 AM, Martin Poirier wrote: > Stealing a copy doesn't count as distribution.
The scenario I am talking about is not a "stolen" distribution, but one willingly given to another party as the quote I was replying to was about working with contracted third-party studios. In that case, the distribution clause is invoked (it is no longer internal) and the *third-party studio* has the right to distribute the software, as the GPL prevents the original company from placing additional restrictions on the GPL distribution. To be clear, I am not talking about the initial companies developing the extensions to Blender. I am solely (in this thread) talking about the distribution to *third-party studios* for purposes of contracted work; the topic of the statement I was refuting. The FAQ point just below yours (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TradeSecretRelease) details the very "trade secret" issue that my email was targeting. Either there are no trade secrets in the distribution given to the third party studio (& hence the distribution is allowed to be copied freely to anyone in accordance with the GPL) or the copy has trade secrets in the distribution & hence is unable to give it to them. They cannot have it both ways (as per my experience with the GPL & as mentioned in the FAQ). -- Regards, Benjamin Tolputt Analyst Programmer _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers