On Fri, 2002-06-14 at 13:40, Walter Landry wrote: > When the professor got the source to the book, did she not read the > license? Was the professor not giving access to the source of the > document? It's not that hard to make an announcement at the beginning > of class offering the course to anyone who wants it. Especially for > such a large class. I'm sure a number of laptop-happy students would > even take her up on it. I just don't see the problem here, unless the > professor just thinks, "Oooh, free stuff!" People think that about > GPL stuff all the time, and they rightfully get slapped down. What is > the problem here?
If there isn't a problem with requiring that the professor distribute the source, then there isn't a problem whether the professor distributes one copy or one thousand. Therefore, the whole volume exemption is unnecessary. If there is a problem with requiring that the professor distribute the source under certain circumstances, then we should spell out what those circumstances are, rather than make up some vague and ethically unjustifiable arbitrary limit because we have some vague dislike for "large" distributors. And if we cannot do any better at describing our problem than pointing at arbitrary numbers, then I would suggest that we really don't know what we want. For an example of an alternative to arbitrary limits, see the example clause I posted in another message in this thread. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
