Re: Possible gpl problem?

[Sven-Haegar Koch]

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Kasper Sandberg wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 00:22 -0700, David Rees wrote:
> > On 8/27/06, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > However, the lack of a freely downloadable version with no
> > > support certainly seems to be a GPL violation to me.  It should be checked
> > > out IMO.
> >
> > Gene, this is not quite the right list for this discussion (have a
> > look at http://gpl-violations.org/) and your understanding of the GPL
> > is incorrect.
> >
> > Just because a company doesn't have source freely downloadable on
> > their website does not mean they are violating the GPL even if they
> > are selling GPL licensed software. Only people who buy the GPL
> > licensed software are entitled to a copy of the source of the binaries
> > they receive.
> as far as i understand, anyone who receieves a copy of the binary, is
> entitled to the source

Yes, but they have to ask their source of the binary for it, not the 
original creator if he gave the source to his customers together with the 
binaries.

c'ya
sven

--

The Internet treats censorship as a routing problem, and routes around it.
(John Gilmore on http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/