Arnt Karlsen <[email protected]> wrote: > >..another can of worms opening, is, what happens next time >Caddilac Cue owners wanna buy a car, can they sell or trade >in their GPL binary ride with no source Caddilac without >losing their license to Linux etc GPLv2 software?
If they implement the process I explained in the previous email on this topic, all parties can be in compliance. A covenant is necessary. You can't just point at FSF or Github and say the source is there if you don't have a contract with FSF or Github to fulfill your source code distribution responsibility. A few years ago we thought there might be a change regarding the first sale doctrine in the U.S., but that didn't happen. So, I think that casual sellers of motor vehicles have a source code distribution requirement which they are - in general - really poorly equipped to handle. Having the parts manufacturer covenant to them to fulfill their responsibility is the best solution I could come up with. Thanks Bruce -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
