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: Isaac@yellow.submarine.pla (Isaac) Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say? Date: 1997/07/22 Message-ID: <5r3dfk$891@camel4.mindspring.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 258208813 References: <5ph4g5$sbs$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5pim4l$5m3$1@news.nyu.edu> <5ptv7r$4e2$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5pu5va$64o$1@news.nyu.edu> <5qdof6$iav$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> Organization: Yellow Brick Road Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss Date: 1997-07-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Ronald Cole wrote: >3.10 is the latest "production release" of GNAT and that ACT's >customers have been enjoying it for quite a while. *That*, in my >opinion, is the act of "distributing". > I think everyone understands your position, but I think it has unpalatable consequences. You're position leads to the conclusion that if I give GPL'd code to someone, I have to be personally responsible for making sure that everyone on earth who wants it gets it. This is an unreasonable burden in my opinion. This would be enough to make sure no one in their right mind distributed. Even if I were to accept your definition of hoarding (and it does sound reasonable), I think any position that requires me to develop the above distribution system is unreasonable. Therefore either the Manifesto is unreasonable, or it does not intend what you say. If the 3.10 is a production release, and ACT's customers are in any way obligated not to re-distribute it, I agree that that is a violation of the GPL. Isaac