Re: Debian on one dvd?
On Thursday 15 December 2005 18:24,
Joe Smith <email@example.com> wrote:
> "Siward de Groot" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
> > Here i think clause b) is sufficient,
> > as info on debian servers is machine-readable,
> > and the internet is a medium customarily used for software interchange.
> > So clause c) is not needed.
> > Last paragraph is not applicable, and though it gives impression that
> > 'offering access' is only OK if binaries were gotten from same place,
> > it does not actually state that, so we are not bound by that.
> The FSF diagrees. See below.
They can disagree all they want,
but as long as they don't write it in the license, we are not bound by it.
Or do you know of any prior ruling or general consensus among lawyers
about this ?
> > And in case you don't agree with that, clause c) can be used,
> > as all packages on this DVD come from a Debian release,
> > which was gotten with an offer to distribute source,
> > and you only redistribute (unmodified) from that distribution,
> > so pointing to debian.org's servers is explicitly OK.
> Debian does not distribute the images under clause B
I wonder why you think that ;
Certainly Debian doesn't distribute it under clause A or C,
so is Debian violating the GPL ?
No need to worry too much about it, though,
because here is another way to comply with the GPL :
Accompany the softwares with written offers to provide the sources,
and if someone wants to take you up on that offer,
The GPL does not require you to actually make good on your offer.
This shows that the GPL is well construed,
because it makes sure it does not get in the way of sharing freely.
If you include a written offer, and sell the software bundle for money,
then the written offer is automatically part of that sale
and the customer can through a court of law enforce their right
to get the sources, i think
(well, actually it's just an assumption).
If, on the other hand, the software bundle is given away for free,
as it would be in this case,
then there is no sales contract,
and consequently no obligation to actually provide the sources.
However, actually providing the sources is even better,
as the cost of providing them can include compensation for
time you spend on that,
and you can fill in your own hourly wages freely.
Or do you think that a court would oblige you to work for a salary
equal to the average wages in India ?
Tough luck for the people that are too poor to be able to
"conveniently use FTP".
have fun !
Siward de Groot
"The military adventurer shooting himself into power
and the politician desperate to rig elections,
have one sole object in mind: it is to get hold of the oil money,"
said Nigerian political analyst Ike Onyekwere.
"For them the ordinary people never mattered."
-- from IRIN.