On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 21:01, Simon Jenkins wrote:Oh, erm... somewhere in here...
Marek Peteraj wrote:
It might be what you meant... but it flatly contradicts what you *said*.On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 19:42, Simon Jenkins wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IANAL, but I'm 99% sure that when you give someone a GPLd executable, you're only obligated to provide that one person with the sources, not the "general public" (read: everyone on earth).True. Just that one person.
That's what i meant by describing the extent to which the 'general public' rule applies.
I fail to see where, could you tell me? :)
Marek
[ _underlining_ yours]"For example, you may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, in which case you'd normally restrict access to those who pay. In that case you're obliged to put a general public notice that _any_ third party, which intends to pay a fee, will do so for the physical act of transferring a copy of GPLed software, which is being distributed in form of machine readable source-code or as an object or executable form."
..."obliged to put a general public notice"...??? I don't think so: If I give source
code to those who pay then I'm done, finished, obligations discharged. If I give
them a written offer of source code instead then _some_ third parties may also
be entitled to the written offer: But even then its *not my responsibility to make
them aware of the offer*! Its the re-distributors obligation to pass along my
written offer, if that's what they received from me. All I've got to do is honour
it if someone (/to whom it was passed along/) takes it up.
