On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 03:05:10AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > There is nothing in the GPL that treats providing source code on a website > as an exception to providing a written offer at the time of distribution > of GPL covered packages on CD-ROM media provided only in binary format. > The distributor must provide the written notice in addition to providing > the source code.
I believe that both Cliff and I conceded that point - the written offer does not seem to have been made and therefore there is a license violation. However, both Cliff and I also argued that nowhere in the GPL does it say that the offer for a CD-ROM must be made - just a software medium. If the written offer is for the user to download the sources from their FTP site, Red Hat may (IANAL) be compliant. > But for purposes of this thread lets get back to if leaving out both the > source code and written notice for over 50% of 2002 is acceptable behavior > from a self-proclaimed friend to Free Software and "Open Source." Is it They've left out the written notice. I'm not convinced they've left out the source code requirement. Feel free to pursue this issue with Red Hat's legal department. They must provide the written offer to be compliant with the GPL. -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member #1, Red Hat Community Ambassador Program -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
