On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 17:05, Michael Schwendt wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 03 Oct 2003 16:48:19 -0600, Bill Anderson wrote: > > > > > > > You must make available the source code _only_ to the party which gets > > > > > > the binary portion. > > > > > > > > > > Unless you ship only the binaries, in which case they must accompany a > > > > > written offer to provide the sources to any third party. > > > > > > > > Cite please. > > > > > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid > > > > That is not in accordance with what was claimed. Note that the > > reference indicates parties who received a copy of the work. > > That is what I referred to with what is quoted at the top. When I ship > only binaries to a person, the duty to make available the source code > is not transferred to the person. That's the purpose of the written > offer. But the offer is to a person who *receives the work*, not just *anyone*. RH is making the source available to people who have *not* received the binaries. That's what started this. As the FAQ says, the clause is intended to say that of A gives B binaries, and the offer to source code, then B gives the binaries to C, then C has an offer that A has to honor. D who has received no binaries has no such right, -- Bill Anderson RHCE #807302597505773 bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
