On Jun 27, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Section 3 doesn't apply to this situation. However, other sections > do. They are distributing in line with the distribution requirement, > but not the "modification and copying" requirements. These are > granted early in the license and covered by the "no further > restrictions" clause.
> You have to be able to copy and modify the source code for it to > comply with the GPL. Let's hope courts see it this way. But then, why is it that I can't use hardware to stop someone from copying or modifying the source code, but I can use hardware to stop someone from copying or modifying the binary? Or is that not so? Remember, section 2 talks about modifying *your* *copies* of the Program, without any reference whatsoever as to whether they're in source or object form. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org} - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/