Rjack wrote:
"That argument simply doesn't hold water. Covenants to offer source code in this and such a way are not "scope of license", they're return consideration.
Of they are not - the offer of source is not to the rights holder, it is a condition of the permission to distribute. Do you think that quoting someone else who is wrong will help you make your (incorrect) case? > The GPL is a true offer of bilateral contract. No, it's a one-way license from the rights holder to the person who wishes to copy and distribute the covered work. The distributor owes nothing back to the rights holder provided that distributes the work properly as required by the GPL. This distribution is to whomever he wishes; if he provides a copy of the sources upon distribution, he is free from any further obligation. The rights holder could not demand a copy of the source from him. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
