Can we?

[Mark Doliner]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:19 PM, David
Woolley<forums at david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:
> Mark Doliner wrote:
>>
>> I feel like this part of the GPL is a little vague.  Relevant excerpt
>> from GPLv3, section 6d:
>>
>> You are allowed to distribute the binary provided you "offer
>> equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through
>> the same place at no further charge. ... If the place to copy the
>
> That seems stronger than V2 for non-network access.  As they are providing
> it on CD, it seems to require that they provide the source on CD, free,
> which makes it even more important that they include it with the original
> CD.

Nope, 6 b) allows binary software to be distributed on a CD as long as
it is accompanied by a written offer to either give people the source
via CD or give people access to the source on a network server.

>> My interpretation is that it's fine for them to distribute an
>> unmodified binary as long as they tell people "you can get the source
>> from http://pidgin.im/"  And I'm personally ok with that.
>
> And they only distribute it using HTTP.

I think this is open to interpretation.  The GPL only states that the
source must be available through "equivalent copying facilities."  If
they make their binary available via FTP and the source available via
HTTP, that's good enough for me because I consider those two to be
equivalent for this purpose.

-Mark