Re: GNU FDL 1.2 draft comment summary posted, and RFD
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 15:21, Walter Landry wrote:
> The problem is not that the kids can't get the source, it is that the
> Peace Corps volunteer can't give them paper copies. The volunteer
> can't satisfy all of the conditions on distribution.
I traced this thread back to my original proposal, and verified that it
did, indeed, require only one of three possibilities:
- give source now
- offer to provide source if asked for the cost of distribution
- attach a statement that describes how to get the source on their own
free of charge.
If the Peace Corps volunteer handwrites the URL for the source on the
back of each of the paper copies, then (s)he has fulfilled the license.
As an added bonus, the Ghanians don't have to do anything to fulfill the
distribution requirements themselves when they pass the document on.
> All that I was suggesting was to change "no charge" to "a charge no
> more than the cost of physically performing source distribution" and
> to keep in the non-commercial distribution restriction. The kids in
> Ghana still won't get the source, but at least they can get paper
> copies.
As I mentioned above, we already provide that option.
And why should the source distributor be non-commercial? For example,
someone could make a profit as an outsourcing provider of source
distribution to fulfill the GPL's requirements; that would be
commercial, and could even be quite profitable. As long as Joe User
doesn't have to pay more than the normal distribution costs, what
difference does it make if the company makes a profit some other way?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: