Re: loophole in the GPL?

2000-03-30 Thread John Cowan
Justin Wells wrote: The GPL says that if I "distribute" copies then I must provide source. I, however, maintain that I am doing no such thing--I am *selling* copies, transfering my ownership of that copy to someone else, not distributing them. The term "distribute" must be understood in the

Re: loophole in the GPL?

2000-03-30 Thread Seth David Schoen
Justin Wells writes: On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 02:52:38PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: The term "distribute" must be understood in the sense in which it is used in the Copyright Act. The term is not actually defined there, but is used thus: "distribute copies or phonorecords of the

Re: loophole in the GPL?

2000-03-30 Thread Justin Wells
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 12:56:54PM -0800, Seth David Schoen wrote: Mmmm, I think you're glossing over what "your copy" means here. I imagine that you're referring to the "first sale" doctrine, which restricts the ability of copyright holders to restrict resale of copies _that they sell_.