GPL Redistribution was --> Re: InstallFest menu - I need fee…

On Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 09:07 PM, Derek Neighbors wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 11:08, Chris Gehlker wrote:
>> I think you may be misunderstanding my proposal as I refined it in a
>> follow on posting. Option (a) is legal but inconvenient. Option (b)
>> has
>> to be "in writing". Since we are giving them a form anyway that
>> seemed
>> to be the place to do it. Option (c) is out unless we have a written
>> offer ourselves. Most of us don't.
>
> I like the train of thinking (really). However, in this case I think
> you are going to strong. If you do not have the source (or a written
> guarantee for it) shame on you. :)

I have the source for the distro I'm currently using. I'm not to sure
about Debian though.
>
> I suspect all the major distribution vendors are guaranting source
> availability (or they could be in violation of the GPL) Certainly if
> you know of ones violating this please submit proper complaints to the
> Free Software Foundation.

I think their motivation to guarantee source availability disappeared
when distribution stopped involving the mailing of heavy tape reels.
They always had the option of providing the source code with the
binary. If they do that, there is no requirement that they make a
guarantee. I don't think you can buy a boxed distribution with source
CDs or download binary ISOs with seeing source ISOs. It's simply
cheaper and less hassle for companies to distribute under option (a)
than under option (b) these days.
>
> That said, another reason why we should pick a distribution and try to
> make that the "standard". For example Debian makes it very easy to
> grab
> the sources.
>
> The spirit of section 3 is that commercial vendors (those making or
> exchanging money) should be liable to share the wealth by being
> obligated to propogate the source. Those not exchanging money should
> be
> able to distribute with just pointing to the source in which they
> obtained the binaries for their source agreement.

I agree that that is the spirit and in fact I'm very satisfied that
PLUG has agreed to put source URLs on the form. Personally, I'll burn
source CDs for anyone who gets a disto from me and wants source.
>
>>> No. They should be informed they can get the source in the same ways
>>> you can get the source. :)
>>
>> I'm sorry but simply telling somebody verbally that they can get the
>> source in the same ways that I can get the source while I hand them a
>> binary is a clear violation of the GPL. I got the binary off some
>
> I don't think it is. If you can actually point them to a place to
> download the source of what binaries you are giving them (or provide a
> written commitment to provide the source upon request) AND you are not
> exchanging money (i.e. non-commericial) I dont think you have violated
> anything.

I'm not sure I completely agree here but I won't turn you in. ;-)
>
> In the case of Gentoo install you actually are getting the sources in
> the case of Debian you can actually add apt-get lines to point to the
> sources of the binaries you are installing. I think this more than
> sufficiently covers section 3 in the case of PLUG.
>
> For other distributions I am not as confident, but I would be suprised
> if there isn't a way to grab Red Hat sources.

I'm not concerned about Gentoo and Debian. RPM style distros are
different. If you get a boxed set, there are clearly labeled 'Install'
and 'Source' disks. Red Hat itself, back when they sold boxed sets,
never provided the Install disks without the Source disks. This is
actually what bothers me, though honestly it only bothers me a little.
If we say to some newbie, "Here are Red Hat binary CDs. We will be
happy to hand them to you or install them on your computer. BTW if you
want the source you only have to find it on the web and spend 4 days
downloading it over your dial-up connection." it does get a little
problematic. I'm sure you can see that.

I won't re-quote your GPL FAQ quote but I never had any problem with
the notion that if the user is DLing the binary she can DL the source
or not at her choice. My concern was that at an InstallFest the user is
*not* downloading the binary. We can't know for sure whether they have
internet access at all.