On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 15:16 +0100, Marek wrote: > No. GPL doesn't include any compensation mechanism at all. It > implicitly prohibits from using the program licensed under the terms > of GPLfor any commercial purpose other than charging for distribution.
ground zero: from the GPL: "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope." so, the GPL is ***ONLY*** about copying, distribution and modification. It has ***NOTHING*** to say about any use, commercial or otherwise that does not involve one of these 3 activities. When it comes to these activities, it lays down the terms under which you, the receiver of the software may engage in them. And the message is the same in every case: you may participate in any of them, in any way, at any time, for any purpose as long any 3rd party receives the exact same rights for the work you make available to them as you have received via the GPL. neither the FSF nor the vast majority of people releasing software under the terms of the GPL agree with your interpretation Marek. in fact, let me amend that. i don't know of *any* other person who interprets the GPL the way you are suggesting. it doesn't really matter whether you can use decontextualized excerpts of the GPL to argue a particular perspective. what you describe is not the intent of the GPL, has not been the effect of the GPL and is not the current (always subject to change) legal status of the GPL. there is absolutely nothing in the GPL that stops anyone taking a program released under its terms and selling it, in combination with other hardware and/or software or by itself, for any amount whatsoever. the only thing the GPL does is to require that the sale takes place under the same terms - the buyer gets all the same rights as the GPL-bound seller. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
