Subject: Re: Change ot topic, back to OVPL
From: Ian Lance Taylor <>
Date: 25 Aug 2005 10:50:40 -0700

Alex Bligh <> writes:

> However, we were looking to change the CDDL as little as possible. Neither
> the GPL, MPL, or CDDL define distribution - I think the OSL is the only
> license that does.

To point out what is probably obvious, the GPL doesn't define
distribution because the GPL is intended to ride on top of copyright
law.  For the GPL, distribution of the work means any time that
copyright law applies.

I'll also note that, for the GPL, distribution within a company will
pretty much always be in terms of clause 3a--the source code is also
available with the binary--so the GPL does not require the source code
to be made available to anybody else.