On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:18:50PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote: > On 2015-06-08 13:36, Pontus Pihlgren wrote: > >On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:24:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote: > >> > >>Which is essentially anyone. Since, if you do release it, you cannot > >>restrict who can use it. > > > >The point I'm trying to make is that B has no obligation to anyone but > >C. If C starts to make the software available no-one can demand the > >source from B. And certainly not from A. > > Not entirely correct. First of all, C can ask the sources from B, > who then in turn will be required to request the sources from A. So > C indirectly puts a request through to A anyway.
Of course. > However, if C have the software from B, but wants the sources from > A, C just gets the distribution from A, and then they can request > the sources explicitly from A anyway. There is no way for A to > prevent this. > So yes, C can easily, and legally, force A to send the sources to them. Nope, this is my example, and in my example there is no "distribution" in the usual sense. Just that USB stick that A sent to B. If B made a copy and sent to C, how would C obtain a "distribution" from A? A little contrived, I know, but I still maintain that C has no claim towards A. /P _______________________________________________ Simh mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
