Re: License requirements for DSP binaries?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 26 September 2003 08:48, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:25:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > >If it's licensed under the GPL, and no source is provided, then it can
> > >not be distributed at all, not even in non-free, unless there never was
> > >source to begin with. (I assume this isn't the case, as you said "no
> > >source code is provided", not "no source code exists".)
> >
> > We should allow it if source code once existed but no longer exists (all
> > the copies of the source code were wiped accidentally at some time in
> > the past).
>
> So it's okay to ignore the DFSG in this case?
Hardly. The argument being made is, I believe, that the binary has by now
become all that is left, and might thus be the preferred form of
modification. Only if that is true, it could be legally redistributed under
the GPL anyway. I would assume the preferred form of modification would also
meet the source code requirement of the DFSG.
Regards
Jan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/dB2i4cR0MEP0sUQRAoDpAKDUZLFIcn8k+i4ir67X6TobVXSNpQCcCXP1
sVLZbgx9f9rTxloYN0zdxjs=
=oHis
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: