Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: >> Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > Not sure if this is possible but would it be fine when modified to read: >> > >> > 3. Furthermore, if you distribute Elm software or parts of Elm, >> > with >> > or without additions developed by you or others, then you must >> > make available the source to all portions of the new system >> > upon request. >> >> I don't think so -- it requires me to keep around a copy of the entire >> source for any system I distribute *forever*. > > Uh? Where do you read that? > > Isn't "all portions of the new system" the same as "the entire sourcecode > of your fork or what you distribute in binary form"?
Yes. And I have to keep it around forever, in case anybody at all asks for a copy. This means that a) I can't make some changes, give them to you and a few others, but refuse, in concert with the few who have copies, to give them to Microsoft. Microsoft can demand a copy of any of us, and we must provide it. b) I can't ever clear away that source in favor of a new version, or fail to keep backups of it -- and cheap to access backups too, because anybody can compel me to provide a copy forever. Either of these is non-free. The GPL's alternative -- provide a copy of the source with any copy of the binary -- nicely evades both of these non-free alternatives. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
