Re: GPL and "free" software

[hughett@chaplin.med.upenn.edu (Paul Hughett)]

Barry Margolin (barmar@bbnplanet.com) wrote:
: In article <7g4jme$5sq$3@netnews.upenn.edu>,
: Paul Hughett <hughett@chaplin.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
: >Paragraph 7 of the GPL (version 2) grants C the right to
: >use/copy/modify/etc the software, even if B made and distributed the
: >copy in violation of the GPL.  C arguably has the same rights
: >with respect to B's modifications of the code, but I would want to do
: >some more study and thinking before I would be really sure of it.

: I don't see that in paragraph 7.  It describes the situation where other
: considerations (such as patent infringement) contradict the GPL, and says
: that the consequence of this is that you can't distribute the program at
: all.

One of us must have a garbled copy or got the wrong section by accident.
The paragraph that I am referring to reads as follows:

7.  Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
these terms and conditions.  You may not impose any further restrictions 
on the recipient's exercise of the rights granted herein.  You are not
responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.

Okay, not that we are both reading from the same text, do you still
disagree with my interpretation?

Also note that B does not have the right to distribute the software--even
his own modifications--under any license other than the GPL.  That's
why they call the GPL a virus.

Paul Hughett