On Friday, 28 January 2022, at 4:23 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > None of these prohibit redistribution. Feel free to delete them from your copy.
I'm intending to distribute a closed source binary release as a kiosk application which will be used as a graphical terminal for students. So anything containing GPL code can't be part of the base installment. Users can decide to download and install binaries on their computer but the moment I distribute a GPL application as an integral part of my system where some of the binaries depend on their existence without alternatives my code and binaries get infected by GPL. I already deleted ghostscript and all fonts from 9front to avoid legal problems. Xen, mp3dec, lzip weren't used by my app the only surprises were diff and patch which I can substitute by not GPL'ed versions. You are right if I would distribute my kiosk software in binary and source form like all plan9 distributions do. Then I would have fulfilled the necessities of GPL regarding redistribution. But the problem of "work based upon", "word depends on" would perhaps remain for some of the tools used by plan9. In common you are right but not when someone makes a binary distribution ... Thanks ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3e07bfdf263a83c8-Mf8a2f7c56fff6ebad6c88447 Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
