On May 14, 11:48 am, Paul Boddie <p...@boddie.org.uk> wrote: > On 14 Mai, 17:37, Patrick Maupin <pmau...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Before, you were busy pointing me at the GPL FAQ as authoritative. > > No, the licence is the authority, although the FAQ would probably be > useful to clarify the licence author's intent in a litigation > environment.
Agreed. > Section 3 of GPLv2 (and section 6(d) of GPLv3 reads similarly): "If > distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access > to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to > copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the > source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the > source along with the object code." > > And here's that FAQ entry which clarifies the intent: > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DistributeWithSourceOnInternet That entry, along with the written offer, certainly covers Ubuntu when they distribute a CD. But if I *download* an ISO, burn it on a CD, and give it away, *I* am the one distributing the physical copy, not Ubuntu, and I am not going to put up an FTP server just so my friend can get source from it. And as section 6 of GPL v3 makes clear, I am not allowed to piggyback on Ubuntu's source offer. My situation *really is* covered by the FAQ entry I referred you to: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnchangedJustBinary > Like I said, if you really have a problem with Ubuntu shipping CDs and > exposing others to copyright infringement litigation. So, deliberately or not, you're trying to change the discussion again. I *never* discussed Ubuntu shipping a physical CD, and never intimated that that was a problem. My discussion was *always* about an individual *downloading* an ISO and *burning* a CD himself, then *distributing* the CD to someone else. > - or even > themselves, since they (and all major distributions) are actively > distributing binaries but not necessarily sources in the very same > download or on the very same disc - then maybe you should take it up > with them. Again, I never intimated this. Please read more carefully in the future before you reply, and then perhaps you will actually make cogent replies that address my points, and then I won't be so frustrated that I make snide comments you take offense at, OK? This has happened on at least 4 separate occasions in this thread, and sometimes a single misunderstanding goes on for quite a few posts, so I'm starting to wonder if it's deliberate. Regards, Pat -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list