On 5 Feb 2003, Robert Love wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 12:18, Nilmoni Deb wrote:
>
> > U missed the point. This is not the case of "If you do not distribute
> > anything, you do not have to make available the source." because the
> > vendor is distributing the binaries and source to the customers just fine.
> > The issue is whether any 3rd party (who is not purchasing the binaries)
> > has the right to get the source too as per clause 3b of
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html . More specifically, is it true that
> > if u obey clause 3a, u don't have to follow clause 3b ?
>
> No, you are missing the point.
I am not going to argue about that. But the last sentence of my previous
email "is it true that if u obey clause 3a, u don't have to follow clause
3b ?" was the point I wanted to clarify which wasn't answered at that
time.
> Clause 3 says "...provided that you also do one of the following"
>
> And 3(a) is done, as the source is included with the binary.
>
> Further, all of the source is available anyhow in various open source
> projects.
>
> Besides, 3(b) says one must accompany the binary with a written offer.
> How do you know that is not being done? It says nothing about source
> available on a website.
Source available on web was just an example. I just could not find a link
on the site which says something like "Apply/register to get source code
on cd/dvd/ftp/http/bla_bla media". Basically, 3b refers to 3rd party
(who is not getting/buying the binaries) and my question was about that.
> But 3(b) is not a requirement since 3(a) is
> met.
And u have answered my question now. Thanks for the clarification.
>
> Robert Love
>
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:18 EST