Jules Bean writes: > Indeed the artistic and GPL make the same restriction.
I wrote: > The GPL does not make any such restriction. The Artistic does include a > similar one, but converts it to a request in the definitions. Jules Bean quotes from the GPL: > You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and > you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. And writes: > This is the only mention of fees in the main portion of the text. Since > it doesn't give permission to sell, I assumed that permission doesn't > exist. Granted, the 'fee for the physical act of transferring a copy' > gives any distributor some freedom of interpretation here. It places no restriction or limit on the fee. You can sell a CD containing only emacs for $100,000 if you wish, or install gcc on a pc and advertise it as "Complete with C compiler!". This is quite different from the license in question which forbids you to sell the software for "big bucks" or to bundle it with a modem, or the Artistic which says that you may only charge a "reasonable" copying fee. -- John Hasler This posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
