[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RedHat SRPMS



On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 13:54, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 05 Oct 2003 15:41:09 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> > On Oct  5, 2003, Bill Anderson <bill noreboots com> wrote:
> > 
> > > And as three FAQ states, the "any third party" is a third party who has
> > > received the binaries, not just Joe on the Street.
> > 
> > Well...  What if your wife (or anyone she distributed the binaries to)
> > gave your written offer to someone else, without the binaries? :-)
> > Wouldn't such a person still be entitled to get the sources?  Or how
> > would you tell whether s/he actually got the binaries?
> 
> What if she gave away the complete product as received (not including
> source, but including the written offer) and the CDs, which contain
> the binaries, were not readable? ;)
> 

Read the above. The full product *is* the binaries. If she distributes
it by giving it to someone she, under the GPL, is *required* to pass on
the offer for source. If she doesn't pass along the offer, she violates
the GPL. We are assuming she does not do so, since once someone starts
doing that the comparison/question is fundamentally different. However,
you are getting away from the point, very much so in fact. See below.


> The thing is passed on to another 3rd party. Whether complete or not,
> doesn't matter.

No, the question is does someone who did *not* get the distribution have
rights to the source? The answer is plainly no according to the GPL and
the FAQ. In the scenario described, you do not have anything. My wife
did not give the binaries to *anyone*. That is the question at hand,
please do not *change* the scenario it only muddies the answer.

If you do not have the software distribution, you do not have rights to
the source.

However, as was stated this has gotten way OT, so any further question
should be addressed privately.

> It doesn't need to be a
> publicly accessible ftp server with anonymous access.


Right. That's part of what was said. Red Hat makes the source to RHEL
available despite *not* being required to do so by the GPL.


-- 
Bill Anderson
RHCE #807302597505773
bill noreboots com






[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]