> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 13:30:47 -0700 (PDT) > From: Mark Rafn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Note that in the above, `distribution' of a file means making the file > > available to others by any means. This includes, for instance, > > installing the file on any machine in such a way that the file is > > accessible by users other than yourself. > > Did this bother anyone else, or am I out in left field again? I don't > think it's actually enforceable, as it becomes a use constraint rather > than a distribution (in the normal sense of the word) constraint, but even > the attempt is unpleasant. I can accept (unhappily) some hoops required > to give out modified copies of your software. I cannot accept that a > Debian customer isn't allowed to change the software on a machine she owns > (but isn't the sole user) without following these hoops. > I think this requirement is compatible with the copyright. Suppose I take a GPL'ed program, change it and put the closed version (sans sources) on my own machine. I did not violate GPL yet. Now suppose that I make the drive NFS-exportable and encourage my paying customers to mount it and access the program from there. Would I violate GPL? I think yes. I think that distribution is precisely this: making something available to others. Giving other people the right to my access files counts as distribution in my book. -- Good luck -Boris One good turn deserves another. -- Gaius Petronius -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]