> From: Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 21 Jul 2002 18:07:50 -0500 > > On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 16:49, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> > This is the root of our disagreement. I think that a sysadmin that put > > a changed copy of latex.fmt in the $TEXFORMATS directory to be used by > > his users, *distributes* a changed LaTeX. You think he does not; the > > problem with your theory is that it undermines both the intentions of > > LPPL AND GPL. You see, there is no reasonable difference between a > > sysadmin who put a closed copy of a GPL'ed program in /usr/bin, and a > > cunning manager who made this program NFS-accessible "for execution > > only" by the people paying a fee. > > Sure there is. In one case, a single computer can use the resulting > binary; in the other, multiple computers can, after paying an access > fee. > What do you mean by "single computer"? A system administrator might install a copy of a program on an AFS drive, where it can be executed by any of thousand computers in a campus-wide network. Note that people on this network might pay a fee to connect (e.g. tuition paid by students in a university). If you allow this to be done, than anybody can easily circumvent GPL by setting up a "virtual campus network" with the sole intention of executing closed programs, effectively stolen from the GPL communinty, by his paying customers. -- Good luck -Boris In order to get a loan you must first prove you don't need it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
