On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 21:46:30 +0200 Wouter Verhelst wrote: [...] > If it isn't, then the GPL > is also non-free, by the very same rationale: the fact that you are > required to produce source when so asked if you do distribute binaries > from source under the GPL means that you are giving up a right ("the > right not to distribute any source") which you might otherwise have, > which could be considered to be a fee.
This argument is flawed. You're *not* giving up the right not to distribute any source, because you can always refrain from distributing the corresponding binaries and have no obligation to provide source. You're *not* giving up the right to distribute binaries without distributing the corresponding source, because, without a license, you would not have the right to distribute binaries in the first place (with or without source). By accepting the GPL, you instead gain the right to distribute binaries with source, and you simply do *not* gain the right to distribute binaries without source. -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgptcx9dLpgAc.pgp
Description: PGP signature