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: 103376,365c587e3030d8f6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dennison@telepath.com
Subject: Re: Win32Ada
Date: 1998/11/20
Message-ID: <734bn4$18v$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 413863968
References: <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com> <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <732be5$dd3$1@news.nyu.edu>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x12.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Nov 20 18:17:27 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.5 [en] (WinNT; I)
Date: 1998-11-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <732be5$dd3$1@news.nyu.edu>,
  kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote:
> In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes:
> >Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that
> >GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components.
>
> Depends on what you mean by "private".  The GPL only imposes
> limitations on what restrictions you can impose on copies of software
> you choose to distribute, but it does not (and cannot) create any
> obligation to distribute the software at all or to any specific person
> or group of people.
>

Yes. I suppose the choice of that word was unfortunate. By "private" I meant
redistributed with souce unvailable and/or a restrictive commercial-type
license. Obviously you can refuse to give someone your source if you also
refuse to give them your binaries.

--
T.E.D.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own