Anders Montonen <[email protected]> writes:

> On Jun 23, 2009, at 21:20, Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> Anders Montonen pisze:
>>> Right, but section four says "You may not copy, modify, sublicense,  
>>> *or*
>>> distribute the Program" (emphasis added). If it just concerned
>>> distribution then there would be no room for interpretation.
>> Still I don't see that as a distribution. The patch by itself is
>> WORTHLESS it needs an executable, moreover - a RIGHT executable.
>
> It's not about distribution. The patched binary obviously doesn't  
> satisfy the terms of the GPL, so by my interpretation you no longer  
> have the license to use it. This renders the patch pointless.

I may have lost track of the argument here, but surely the GPL is all
about distribution? Are you claiming it also restricts use?

I don't see anything in the GPL faq that forbids modifying a GPL'ed
program, provided it is not distributed.

-- 

John Devereux
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to