From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
From: user@yellow.submarine.pla ()
Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say?
Date: 1997/07/05
Message-ID: <5pmiuv$2f1@camel4.mindspring.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 254863714
References: <5pb8gf$j4m@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk> <5pbd6q$8si$1@news.nyu.edu>
 <5ph4g5$sbs$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5pim4l$5m3$1@news.nyu.edu>
 <5pmg6e$nai$1@Venus.mcs.net>
Organization: Yellow Brick Road
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-07-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <5pmg6e$nai$1@Venus.mcs.net>, Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>Hmmm, so if it is in your best interest you can ignore the GPL mandate
>to allow unlimited redistribution if you distribute at all?  Why doesn't
>this philosophy apply to everyone else?
>

The GPL "mandates" unlimited redistribution in the sense that anyone who
gets GPL'd code can redistribute it.  But it does not require anyone to
make sure that everyone on earth and beyond has a copy. (Well unless 
you use one of those goofy options to making the source immediately
available).  

This issue has been hashed out many times in this thread.  You couldn't
possibly have missed it.


Isaac