On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 10:07:37AM -0800, David Johnson wrote:
> > My belief is that the provisions that might require you to
> > give your source code to Troll, even if the binary code is not
> > distributed to others, were the most egregious (the GPL only obligates
> > you to give source code to people you give binaries to; if you don't
> > give someone binaries, you don't have to give them source either).
>
> Section 6c, which talks about giving a copy to Troll Tech, only applies
> to section 6, which is concerned with distribution. Basically, if and
> only if you distribute such a program, then Troll Tech also gets a copy
> if they ask. The QPL is completely silent on personal uses, disallows
> "private" distributions, and is hunky-dory with public distributions.
Troll Tech indicates it is their intention to catch people who are not
distributing code to cough up a copy. Stark contrast to what you claim
here. Their intent seems to be about 9/10 of what a license on a piece of
software means in the US at least, based on what little case law there is
on the matter.
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian Linux developer
http://tank.debian.net GnuPG key pub 1024D/DCF9DAB3 sub 2048g/3F9C2A43
http://www.debian.org 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
If we want something nice to get born in nine months, then sex has to
happen. We want to have the kind of sex that is acceptable and fun for both
people, not the kind where someone is getting screwed. Let's get some cross
fertilization, but not someone getting screwed.
-- Larry Wall
Attachment:
pgpaDqHykfzvn.pgp
Description: PGP signature