"Christopher Priest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Why should anyone but the source be "required" to keep or distribute source > code when it is freely available from Debian. The web was not > available when
Debian may not be around forever. Many embedded devlopers don't publicize which distribution they derive from. > the license was conceived. If I were a judge, and I looked at the intent of > the license, I'd say the flavour and intent is served by proper > attribution, The license -- the GPL -- very specifically says that the source must be included with the software. It goes to some effort to detail what notice is an acceptable alternative, and it involves three-year guarantees. > and reasonable access to the source as intended, especially if it was by > reference to the source web site.and I'd note that this user was not tring > to assume ownership. > > Law is about damages, not about forcing people to do what you want.. No, in the case of copyright law it is explicitly about granted permissions. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]