Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!uci-ics!news From: schmidt@crimee.ics.uci.edu (Doug Schmidt) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Questions about "Free Software Foundation" (long) Message-ID: <1989Sep29.203643.20826@paris.ics.uci.edu> Date: 29 Sep 89 20:36:43 GMT References: <6602@thor.acc.stolaf.edu> <110004@gore.com> <2247@munnari.oz.au> Sender: news@paris.ics.uci.edu (Network News) Reply-To: schmidt@crimee.ics.uci.edu (Doug Schmidt) Organization: University of California, Irvine - Dept of ICS Lines: 65 In-reply-to: ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe) In article <2247@munnari.oz.au> you write: >Go read the copyleft. That's not what it says. The copyleft says > "You may copy and distribute the Program (or a portion or derivative > of it ...) provided that you ... > accompany it it with a written offer, valid for at least three > years, to give ***ANY*** ***THIRD PARTY*** free ... a complete > machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code ..." I'm glad you finally cited the `offending line'. Now we can be concrete. You are misquoting/misinterpreting the GPL. Here's the actual quote: ---------------------------------------- 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a portion or derivative of it, under Paragraph 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: a) accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above; or, b) accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party free (except for a nominal charge for the cost of distribution) a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above; or, c) accompany it with the information you received as to where the corresponding source code may be obtained. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form alone.) ---------------------------------------- Note the key line omitted in your posting: ---------------------------------------- You may copy and distribute the Program (or a portion or derivative of it, under Paragraph 2) in object code or executable form ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------- This section deals with the responsibilities for people who want to distribute a GNU derived *object* code or *executable* program. It states that if you want to distribute the object or executable then you also must ensure the source is available. This should be no surprise, and should not conflict with encouraging software sharing. However, this section in the GPL has nothing to do with your original complaint, which was: ---------------------------------------- I can't even afford to give the diffs back to the original authors, because the CopyLeft would land me with obligations for years. ---------------------------------------- If you can provide additional `proof' for your position I'd like to see it. It is certainly not the intention of the GPL to unduly burden those who want to help make the GNU software more robust. Doug -- schmidt@ics.uci.edu (ARPA) | Per me si va nella citta' dolente. office: (714) 856-4043 | Per me si va nell'eterno dolore. | Per me si va tra la perduta gente. | Lasciate ogni speranza o voi ch'entrate.