Re: Mgetty should be in non-free?
Jules Bean writes:
> Indeed the artistic and GPL make the same restriction.
> The GPL does not make any such restriction. The Artistic does include a
> similar one, but converts it to a request in the definitions.
Jules Bean quotes from the GPL:
> You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
> you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.
> This is the only mention of fees in the main portion of the text. Since
> it doesn't give permission to sell, I assumed that permission doesn't
> exist. Granted, the 'fee for the physical act of transferring a copy'
> gives any distributor some freedom of interpretation here.
It places no restriction or limit on the fee. You can sell a CD containing
only emacs for $100,000 if you wish, or install gcc on a pc and advertise
it as "Complete with C compiler!". This is quite different from the
license in question which forbids you to sell the software for "big bucks"
or to bundle it with a modem, or the Artistic which says that you may only
charge a "reasonable" copying fee.
John Hasler This posting is in the public domain.
firstname.lastname@example.org Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.