Daniel Carrera writes: > Michael Poole wrote: > > As GPL section 3(c) indicates, you may use that option if you were > > given a written offer to provide source *and* your distribution is > > "noncommercial". You have given no hint whether your distribution > > could be considered commercial, and the GPL is unfortunately vague > > as to what it means by "noncommercial distribution". > > These CDs are for the SCALE conference (Sourthern California Linux > Expo). I was thinking of selling the CDs at like $1 to recover the > cost. I guess that constitutes "commercial" use :(
My guess is that this would be noncommercial, but if you want legal advice (advice you can cite on if someone complains) you need to get it from a lawyer, which I am not. > If by "written permission" the GPL means "paper", then I certainly > don't have that :( If written can be "electronic" I'll check the > distribution to see if it has that. > > > The catch is that when you download a GPLed executable, you usually > > have "equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place", > > which satisifes section 3(a) but is not a written offer under 3(b). > > :( > Does that mean that all the people selling Knoppix CDs for $2 are > breaking the law? I suspect not, but except in egregious cases, I try not to come to legal conclusions about either tort or criminal liability. That kind of thing is better left to those who are paid to do it. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
