Re: Binaries under GPL(2)
25-Nov-03 23:11 Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> I think Alexander's point may have merit. If you distribute whatever
>> precise bits it was that the copyright holder waved a copy of the GPL
>> over, those bits must be assumed to be "the Program", and as such GPL
>> #2 gives you right to distribute a modified version of the bits.
> At least, the way I read the GPL, 2 gives you the right to distribute
> a modified version of the Program Source (which is what 1 covers).
> 1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
> source code as you receive it, in any medium, [...]
> 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
> of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
> distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section
> 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
> [...]
Could you please describe the way you read the GPL in more details?
How do you understand "under the terms of"? What are "the terms of
Section 1" exactly, in your opinion?
I can see the following possibilities to interpret the words "under
the terms of Section 1" in Section 2:
A1. The same way as in "may be distributed under the terms of this
General Public License" (as used in GPL 0 for example), that is the
whole text of Section 1 is taken literally and bounds distributor.
So Section 2 by itself doesn't give any permissions, it only refers
to Section 1. And because Section 1 only talks about original
source, there is no permission to distribute modifications at all.
Strange interpretation, though the most straightforward probably...
A2. The same as A1 but Section 1 "bounds" third parties, that is
Section 2 is a permission to distribute modifications provided that
this modifications are licensed to all third parties under the terms
of Section 1. Also strange and less straightforward...
B1. The whole Section 1 is treated as a requirement, so its text
isn't taken literally and "You may" is replaced by "You must". Hence
modifications can only be distributed together with the original
source. More or less reasonable but not very straightforward...
B2. Only the list of conditions ("the terms") is taken from Section
1, that is only the part after "provided that". So Section 2 gives a
permission to distribute modifications if all copyright notices are
kept intact etc. IMHO reasonable enough and straightforward
enough...
I don't see how to construct your interpretation. How to get rid of
"verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it" but
retain "source code"? How does it work in case of Section 3?
Sasha
Reply to: