Re: Copyright Question
"Christopher Priest" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Why should anyone but the source be "required" to keep or distribute source
> code when it is freely available from Debian. The web was not
> available when
Debian may not be around forever. Many embedded devlopers don't
publicize which distribution they derive from.
> the license was conceived. If I were a judge, and I looked at the intent of
> the license, I'd say the flavour and intent is served by proper
The license -- the GPL -- very specifically says that the source must
be included with the software. It goes to some effort to detail what
notice is an acceptable alternative, and it involves three-year guarantees.
> and reasonable access to the source as intended, especially if it was by
> reference to the source web site.and I'd note that this user was not tring
> to assume ownership.
> Law is about damages, not about forcing people to do what you want..
No, in the case of copyright law it is explicitly about granted permissions.
Brian Sniffen email@example.com