Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Merijn de Weerd wrote: > > [... modify any gpl'd code ...] > >> was just saying that that should change: also in-house code >> should be shared, once it's out of testing. > > That would be at odds with copyright law (which the GPL blatantly > misstates by saying that "nothing else grants you permission to > modify or distribute"), dear law student.
Well, at least as long he keeps within the confines of copyright law with regard to number of copies for private use. The GPL is not intended to make normal use of software harder, and an obligation to distribute (as opposed to conditions on redistribution, like now) would hamper use of the software unreasonably. It would also require bookkeeping where you got the software from and who would be entitled to get sent any modifications. With the GPL, you only need to worry about downstream concerning your obligations. Adding upstream worries to it does not seem like a good idea. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
