[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL

On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 05:44:05PM -0600, Joe Moore wrote:
> "keep intact" does not mean the same as "unmodified".

But we're still talking about a case where not all derived works are

> And the terms of Section 1 are that you must "conspicuously and
> appropriately publish" notices of the copyright and license, and "keep
> intact" the license references and warranty disclaimer.  

Yes, exactly.

> Wrong. It's "copy and distribute".  You can distribute without making
> copies, and you can copy without distributing.

I don't think you understand what copyright law allows you
to do in the absence of explicit permission.

> The GPL grants that license.  You may make an unlimited number of copies of
> the source code (verbatim: "as you receive it") under the terms of section
> 1.  That license grant is unconditional.

Well, except that there are conditions, (and can be revoked if you don't
follow the terms).

> Once you modify the source, you're dealing with Section 2.


> > Maybe you think the terms of Section 1 don't apply?
> What term of Section 1 do you think^Wpostulate is being violated by your
> hypothetical "Paladium GCC"?

Different tangent.  

In the paladium gcc tangent, it was section 2 that would not have been


Reply to: