On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:35:00 +0200, metux IT consult wrote in message <626f5214-191c-1f90-b806-652ae892c...@gr13.net>:
> On 28.06.2017 01:24, Rick Moen wrote: > > Quoting Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult (enrico.weig...@gr13.net): > > > >> wait a second - these grsecurity folks are *selling* kernel > >> patches ? how is that compatible w/ the gpl ? > > > > Please explain to me why I may not offer to sell a codebase subject > > to GPLv[23] licence terms. > > By selling, I mean, you'll first have to pay before you get the code. .."after" works too. > But anybody republish it at will (as long as complying to GPL), so > how can that business model work ? ..this goes anywhere from "common decency", "charity" to "profitable business." > > Please note that FSF itself has been selling collections of GNU > > software for well over 30 years. > > Software *collections*, Distro. So, you're paying for the transport > medium and the collection as a whole, not the individual packages. ..e.g. Red Hat sell their GPL binaries at a nice profit, AFAIK. > Anybody can pick out individual source trees from commercial distros > and redistribute them at will. You just can't do that with the > distribution media 1:1. ..it depends, smart people would put their source on their "1:1 binary:source" media and sell it all at once, dearly. You only need to offer source code to those you distributed GPL binaries to, AFAIU the GPLs. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
