On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 21:46:30 +0200 Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[...]
> If it isn't, then the GPL
> is also non-free, by the very same rationale: the fact that you are
> required to produce source when so asked if you do distribute binaries
> from source under the GPL means that you are giving up a right ("the
> right not to distribute any source") which you might otherwise have,
> which could be considered to be a fee.
This argument is flawed.
You're *not* giving up the right not to distribute any source, because
you can always refrain from distributing the corresponding binaries and
have no obligation to provide source.
You're *not* giving up the right to distribute binaries without
distributing the corresponding source, because, without a license, you
would not have the right to distribute binaries in the first place (with
or without source).
By accepting the GPL, you instead gain the right to distribute binaries
with source, and you simply do *not* gain the right to distribute
binaries without source.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpupz3AB5URw.pgp
Description: PGP signature