Subject: GPL v3 article - is this the public performance idea?
From: Ben Tilly <btilly@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 17:42:22 -0700

Mike Olson of Sleepycat is quoted in:

http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3495981

There is a nice little flamewar on /. about the result.  Everyone and his dog
thinks that the change in terms is impossible, nobody would go for it.

Personally I'm wondering whether this is the idea that Bruce Perens
mentioned to me several years ago, that hosting a website is a public
performance, copyright law gives copyright owners the right to control
public performances, and the GPL v2 does not grant the right to
publically perform works.  Therefore if the GPL v3 did grant this right,
it could use it to push Amazon etc to share source code just like the
GPL currently pushes proprietary software vendors to do so.

If it is not that, then what is it?

The idea of allowing companies to opt out of sharing code for a fee is
new to me, I'm kind of curious how that would work.

Cheers,
Ben