There may be a slight misunderstanding. That's not quite what I was
mentioning. Let's back up for a moment to what nadebula.1984 said.
nadebula.1984's original statement that I was responding to about was exactly
this: "I can publish a GNU GPL v3-or-Later licensed free/libre software, but
I can also explicitly prohibit anyone from using it without violating GNU
GPL."
Let's stop there for a moment. Note their words are "using it", not
"distributing it" but "using" it. As in, executing the program on their CPU.
Perhaps that isn't what they meant (since later comments refer to
distributing/sharing) but it's what they said because "using" a program is
not the same as "distributing" or "sharing" it.
Anyway, I was pointing out that a prohibition on "using" the program (i.e.,
executing it on their CPU) would be a "further restriction" within the
meaning of Section 10. That's why I had quoted the piece like "This License
explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program."
So they can "use" it (assuming that they get a copy.) :)
But yes, so would the scenario you mentioned.
