Re: what DOES the GPL really say?

[kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)]

In article <m2u3hof1w3.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> Ronald Cole <ronald@ridgenet.net> writes:
>According to the Manifesto, Stallman had to write GNU so that he could
>share it with other people who liked it *and* so that everyone would
>be able to obtain good system software free.  Stallman also said that
>he is required to consider it wrong for one to hoard information.  

Both of these are correct summaries, to my understanding.

>If you received and modified GNU software, you shouldn't be required to
>share it, *unless* you have engaged in the act of "distribution".

The first problem is what is meant by "distribution" and what is meant
by "being required to share it".

>Once you have distributed, being selective about further distributions
>is indistinguishable from "hoarding",

Not at all, and this ties in to my previous comment.  Suppose I write
some software and make it available on a public FTP site.  That would,
by nearly anybody's definition, consitute making a "distribution".

Now somebody comes to me and says they'd like a copy of my program,
but they don't have network access.  Not only that, but the only media
they can read is a CD-ROM recorded using a nonstandard encoding.  Do
you feel I have a moral obligation to create such a CD-ROM for that
person?

Yes, this is an extreme example, but if you truely believe in the
obligation to share software, it would apply here as well.

If you don't think it would apply there as well, tell us precisely
what criteria you would use to determine whether there was a moral
obligation to satisfy any particular request.

>I've stated that I don't believe making snapshots available for
>testing to be "distributing".  However, you've previously posted that
>3.10 is the latest "production release" of GNAT and that ACT's
>customers have been enjoying it for quite a while. 

No, Robert has not said that.  I'll let him speak for himself but I
will say there's never been *any* version of GNAT either inside or
outside of ACT that identified itself as "3.10".

>*That*, in my opinion, is the act of "distributing".

You need to define "distributing" more precisely before one can judge
whether they agree with your opinion or not.