>>>>> Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>> Tim Jackson wrote:
>> (Hint: Differences include the fact that one uses the term "lawfully
>> made" while the other doesn't. Similarities include the fact that
>> both relate only to the sale or transfer or other disposal of "that
>> copy". Not to the creation of new copies from it.)
[...]
> again: creation of new copies in the case of GCC is perfectly fine
> and unrestricted thanks to the GPL's reproduction permission.
It isn't. ... /Until/ (and /unless/) one /accepts/ GNU GPL
(with /all/ its permissions and restrictions) first.
Should a copy be made that doesn't comply with /all/ the GNU GPL
conditions (such as: a binary made from a modified source
without that source being made available) -- it's an infringing
copy, which one is /not/ allowed to distribute (AIUI) under
either doctrine.
Thus... Long live copyleft!
[...]
PS. And thanks Tim Jackson for the valuable comments on the subject.
--
FSF associate member #7257
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
