Russell Nelson wrote: > > It would be wrong to require publication of modified versions > > that are used privately, but inviting the public to use a server > > is not private use. > > I'm not sure that the GPL-using community is going to agree with you > on this. For example, if someone decides to distribute Linux under > the GPLv3, and someone else runs it on a server, are they bound by the > GPLv3 to become a Linux distributor? I haven't seen it, so I'm just > speculating.
Only if the Linux kernel (are we talking kernel or distro here?) displays the notice in the first place, I think. Emile -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
