On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, C.M. Connelly wrote: > So the restriction of a ``nominal'' or ``reasonable'' charge is > enough to cause a problem here, even if there was no real charge > being made? (I'm assuming that the problem here is with the first > clause of the DFSG, ... > Doesn't the GPL say pretty much the same thing in Section 3.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
Nope. The GPL portion you cite is about including source during/after delivering the software, not about the software itself. Under the GPL, one can sell the software for as much as the market will bear. However, one cannot distribute the software without making the source available cheaply), nor bar the customer from distributing the software (also with source) as they choose. -- Mark Rafn [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.dagon.net/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
