Re: Binaries under GPL(2)
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Binaries under GPL(2)
- From: Alexander Cherepanov <cherepan@mccme.ru>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 01:28:02 +0300 (MSK)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 2.07b5.XAGB.HPE6EQ@cherepan.mccme.ru.msgid>
- In-reply-to: <20031201003754.GS13199@donarmstrong.com>
- References: <20031201003754.GS13199@donarmstrong.com> <20031119193630.GU21640@nimrod> <87vfpg2knj.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> <20031119195907.GW21640@nimrod> <2.07b5.1DQKX.HOVJTY@cherepan.mccme.ru.msgid> <2.07b5.1HO1.HOXONC@cherepan.mccme.ru.msgid> <2.07b5.XZQJ.HOZPKB@cherepan.mccme.ru.msgid> <20031127040141.GL13199@donarmstrong.com> <87vfp6yz3k.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> <20031129230006.GN13199@donarmstrong.com> <87k75igjhi.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>
30-Nov-03 16:37 Don Armstrong wrote:
> If you read section 2 this way, then there is no need for a section 3
> at all.
And that (together with the intention of the license expressed in
Preamble) seems to be the only reason why Section 2 cannot be
interpreted as permitting to distribute binaries. There are no direct
arguments. Sadly...
Sasha
Reply to: