Re: Solaris 2.6 and Linux
Jon Hamilton (hamilton@pobox.com)
Sat, 27 Sep 1997 17:31:19 -0500
In message <19970927155411.51012@test.legislate.com>, Raul Miller writes:
} Jeffrey B. Siegal <jbs@quiotix.com> wrote:
} > Still, we're talking about many products that are totally outside the compu
} ter
} > industry. Consumer products do not generally include license agreements in
} > their manuals (they many not include a manual at all). Something strange l
} ike
} > may generate a huge volume of support calls from confused or curious
} > customers, adding to the cost of the product (many of these products are ve
} ry
} > inexpensive, so any additional cost can be a big deal).
} >
} > In most cases, it makes more sense to just go with commercial software for
} > these applications, even if the Free Software is technically superior and,
} on
} > the surface, less expensive. Sad but true.
}
} Huh?
}
} So you're saying that if I sell automated whatzits, with some fsf software
} in rom, for something like $99, it'll break my back to offer the source
} for the software on floppy for another $99?
It may not break your back, but if it doesn't cost you $99 to put the
source on floppy, it isn't within the letter of the GPL:
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
--
Jon Hamilton hamilton@pobox.com | hamilton@pitviper.med.ge.com
<A HREF="http://www.pobox.com/~hamilton">Jon Hamilton's homepage</A>