Re: Not inherently free, but inherently non-free?

[Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org>]

On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 08:49:52AM +0200, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>     LJ> Section 3 (Copying in quantity): Forces to distribute
>     LJ> transparent (source) along with the opaque (binary) form: forced
>     LJ> distribution of goes against the spirit of the DFSG, altough not
>     LJ> its letter. Apply similarities with the Desert Island test.
> 
> I don't understand how the Desert Island test applies here to GFDL and
> not to GPL.  Could you explain it (or give a particular pointer),
> please?

The GPL says that if you give somebody a binary, you have to make the
source available to them, too.  It doesn't say that you have to make it
available to anyone else.  If I'm on a desert island and I want to
give my modified binary to my island friend, the GPL doesn't prevent
that.

I'm not entirely sure how the desert island test applies to this part of
the GFDL.

-- 
Glenn Maynard