> > You should provide a more significant objection than "your modifications > > have value".
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 04:26:59AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > I don't think it's an "insigificant" objection. I do. The license prohibits any redistribution at all, and instead of focussing on that, you are pushing a line of logic that seems to make the GPL non-free. > > "Distribution of source", as required by the GPL, has value, so your > > logic would this mean that the GPL is non-free. > > No, because modification is not distribution, and I cannot copyright my act > of distribution[1]. You can't copyright gold, either. -- Raul
