Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S264380AbTFKUSA (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:18:00 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264374AbTFKUSA
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:18:00 -0400
Received: from slider.rack66.net ([212.3.252.135]:55018 "EHLO
	slider.rack66.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264380AbTFKUR5
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:17:57 -0400
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:31:40 +0200
From: Filip Van Raemdonck <filipvr@xs4all.be>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: "any third party" (Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL)
Message-ID: <20030611203140.GD18726@debian>
Mail-Followup-To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20030611192232.GB16164@fs.tum.de> <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKIEJKDJAA.davids@webmaster.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKIEJKDJAA.davids@webmaster.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1723
Lines: 41

On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 01:12:59PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:39:36AM -0700, Randolph Bentson wrote:
> > >
> > > If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
> > > form under clause 3b, one might reasonably argue that the distributor
> > > need only distribute the source to those third parties in possession
> > > of the written offer which must be included.  Others may argue that
> > 
> > "Accompany it with a written offer, ..., to give any third party, ..., a
> > complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code..."
> >
> > This is non-ambiguous. You might _not_ "reasonably argue" about it, the
> > "any third party" leaves no room for other interpretations.
> 
> 	Think about this logically. Suppose a company releases a product and
> (maybe) accompanies it with such a written offer (I mean, how could you know
> for sure if you hadn't seen it?). You call the company up to try to enforce
> the offer. They say, "What offer?" You say, "the written offer that
> accompanied some copies of your product." You can't cite the text of the
> written offer, you can't specify any specific person they made the offer to.
<snip>
> Why specify a written offer if it just meant that you had to offer it?

Because:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatDoesWrittenOfferValid


Regards,

Filip

-- 
"Computers are not intelligent.  They only think they are."
	-- Martin Schulze
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/