Re: GNU FDL 1.2 draft comment summary posted, and RFD
On Fri, 2002-06-14 at 17:52, Walter Landry wrote:
> Jeff Licquia <licquia@debian.org> wrote:
> > Regarding your specific concerns: The "at no charge" part was predicated
> > on an understanding that this was one of three options. You can either
> > distribute source right then, offer to give them source for the cost
> > distribution, or provide a pointer to a place to get it free. So your
> > case should be covered by one of the two alternatives. Ditto for
> > "non-commercial"; it's hard to run a business with no profit. :-)
>
> Well, to get back to the hypothetical schoolkids in Ghana, I doubt
> that there is any way that they could get anything like that for "no
> charge". It's not like they can just surf over to www.debian.org to
> satisfy all of their free content needs. I can get things for "free"
> because I've already paid for the infrastructure. The infrastructure
> (including my computer) depreciates every time I use it, so it isn't
> really free either. It is just that the costs are not directly tied
> to what I'm getting.
That's not the problem of the distributor. If they handwrite "you can
get your own copy from http://foo.com/bar"; on the back of the last page,
they aren't required to give you network access for free to get the
source. As you say, it's an indirect cost.
In the case of the school, one of the teachers could write to his rich
cousin in Addis Ababa and ask her to get the source.
If someone in the next county is giving away free puppies, is it fraud
because you had to pay for gas to get there?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: