Hyman Rosen wrote:
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
So a tarball with all the sources is somehow different from
compiled and linked binary resulting from the same sources
Of course. The former is a verbatim copy of the source code,
readily reconstructed from its transmitted form. The other is
not. In any case, the only thing you have argued is that the
former may not be a verbatim copy either. It seems unlikely that
such a view would prevail, however.
See also Section 3
Of what? The copyright code? The GPL? You cannot expect people to
make your arguments for you, because your arguments are
invariably incorrect. You need to state your arguments, and then
we will point out to you how they are wrong.
"Use" of an *unmodified* copy of source code by compiling and
executing on a computer is not restricted by the GPL:
From the GPL section 0:
"Activities other than copying, distribution and modification
are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope."
Private/internal use (running, copying, modification)
of program is essentially unrestricted.
http://ossipedia.ipa.go.jp/legalinfo/20071221-4.pdf
See also:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/object-code.txt
Sincerely,
Rjack :)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
