Subject: Re: embedded systems vs. GPL
From: "Russell Nelson" <nelson@CRYNWR.COM>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1993 10:10:27 EDT

On Wed, 16 Jun 93 18:16:20 -0700, gnu@CYGNUS.COM wrote:
> > Hmmm...  I wonder.  Maybe a new FSB (call it GPL Sources) could sell
> > "GPL Compliance" to people.  The GPL-code-user would include a note
> > in their documentation saying that source code is available from GPL
> > Sources. GPL Sources would indemnify the GPL-code-user against claims
> > that the source was not available.  It would also meet the need for
> > guaranteeing source code availability for three years.
> The main problem with this is that you can charge "no more than your
> cost of physically performing source distribution" (from COPYING),
> which means that nobody can make a profit from distributing source.

That wording has been changed over the lifetime of the GPL.  Version
1 says "except for a nominal charge for the cost of distribution".

> A few years ago, RMS indicated a willingness to think about changing
> the terms to allow some small profit to be made on
> source-distribution-to-satisfy-binary-distribution, but nobody has
> wanted to push the issue, so nothing has happened.

GPS, Inc. is in line with the principles of the GPL, so 1) few
would care if it violated the exact wording of the GPL, and 2) it
should be no trouble to change the wording.

But otherwise you are perfectly correct.

-russ <> What canst *thou* say?
Crynwr Software           Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice  |  LPF member - ask me about
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX    |  the harm software patents do.