Getting mono into FC extras

[Michael Peters]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:46:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway
<tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> Well, for example, Thomson may be willing to permit unlimited
> redistribution of mp3 decoders if a fee is paid. This would still not be
> permitted under the GPL. (IANAL).

Do patents cover the binary or only the source?
I thought patents only covered the binary, and the source was free to
distribute - the patent filing already discloses anything related to
the patent that someones source code would.

I'm asking because if patent only covered binary, then if a fee was
paid for unlimited mp3 encode/decode support, I don't see how it would
be a GPL violation - since you are allowed to distribute the source.
Isn't the GPL about the source and its free availability?

-- 
http://mpeters.us/