Re: Monta Vista software license terms

From: Robert Love <rml@mvista.com>
To: Nilmoni Deb <ndeb@ece.cmu.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Monta Vista software license terms
Date: 05 Feb 2003 12:23:12 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1044465791.810.36.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96L.1030205121225.19700C-100000@frodo.ece.cmu.edu>

On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 12:18, Nilmoni Deb wrote:

> U missed the point. This is not the case of "If you do not distribute
> anything, you do not have to make available the source." because the
> vendor is distributing the binaries and source to the customers just fine.
> The issue is whether any 3rd party (who is not purchasing the binaries) 
> has the right to get the source too as per clause 3b of
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html . More specifically, is it true that
> if u obey clause 3a, u don't have to follow clause 3b ?

No, you are missing the point.

Clause 3 says "...provided that you also do one of the following"

And 3(a) is done, as the source is included with the binary.

Further, all of the source is available anyhow in various open source
projects.

Besides, 3(b) says one must accompany the binary with a written offer.
How do you know that is not being done? It says nothing about source
available on a website.  But 3(b) is not a requirement since 3(a) is
met.

	Robert Love