amicus_curious wrote:
"Hyman Rosen" <[email protected]> wrote
news:[email protected]...
<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html>
However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under
this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.
This refers to people who have received the program accompanied by the
license.
That is not what it says, silly. It says that parties who have received
"copies" from you. It makes no distinction about whether or not the
copy is given "properly", according to their definitions, at least.
Indeed, the whole section has its purpose as ensuring that the
downstream user has a valid license, i.e. "The act of running the
Program is not restricted...".
It says "received copies under this license". A recipient has
received something under the GPL if the distributor has given
it to him under the GPL, and that can only be done by giving a
copy of the GPL along with the covered work. Otherwise, if the
distributor had no other legal right to make and distribute
copies, the recipient simply has an illegal copy of the work.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
