> > if he decides to make changes and distribute them, > i.e, sell to > > other fisherman, then he must make those changes > available back to > > GNU > > I realize this is meant to be funny, rather than factually > correct > (mixing up GPL with GNU, for one), but there's no such > requirement in > the GPL. > > Nobody's required to make changes available *back* to > anyone else, > under any Free Software license whatsoever, distributing > the software > or not. The requirement is to make them available > *forward* to the > recipients of that modified version of the software. > > This is unlike some Open Source licenses, that do make such > requirements, even if you'd rather not distribute the > software. > > -- Yes, it meant to be funny! In a thread where many people are angry and they stand their ground not wanting to give an inch in this issue. No matter what happens, they will continue to say it is simply "Linux" for me, or okay okay, I will say "GNU/Linux" are you happy now? However, either people like Les read more into the GPL than what is there, or he has been biten with it in one way or another. Just like the Mepis/Zenwalk examples I used previously in the thread, they modified the code and released it, yet they were not releasing the changes/what they modified back to the community. They got into some kind of trouble and were forced to release the code/make it available in order to be GPL compliant. The restrictions or the viral part of the GPL is what bites many people and what turns them against it :( Many authors have changed licenses to others besides the GPL, because according to them, it restricts their freedoms :( I am not a software developer, I am only an end user. I use several different versions of Linux/Gnu/Linux when I can, I have Fedora 9, SystemRescueCD, Knoppix 5.1, Gparted LiveCD, Clonezilla, and Slax Linux LiveCD. For instance, I have created some modules for the Slax-Linux Live CD Distribution, http://www.slax.org/modules.php?author=151 Not all the modules are GPL, there is one GNU/Grub. I use the source and build it according to rules of creating modules for Slax. Is there any chance I can get sued because I created those modules? Am I violating any GPL rules when I posted those modules on the Slax website? The sources are freely available, the build scripts is contained within each module, does that satisfy the GPL? Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
