[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:55:24 +0000 "Michael Mortimore" <nospamformike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/28/06, paul sutton <zleap@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Again it sounds like a mis interpratation of the GPL, > > Don't agree with you there. He says that once it's been downloaded > from the site then it's pure GPL and you can give it away for free if > you want. it's only the act of dowloading that is subject to the > licensing restrictions. It's the act of downloading upgrades that is the main issue - the GPL allows anyone to redistribute the original downloaded copy so that part is a red herring. What matters is the method of obtaining updates *between* releases. He just wants to charge for downloading those, that's all. Those updates that survive can be incorporated into the next version. Easy. Projects have the right to restrict access to development code of GPL projects - it has to be that way, otherwise every free software developer would have to use public CVS/SVN repositories for even the smallest package. No, all that matters is that when the code is distributed, the source code is available as per the GPL. Until distribution, the modifications to the current release do not have to be available to anyone. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgp6mDZDmLYoB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html