Review of GPL code requirements text (source for "expensive" binaries?)

[Tony Whitmore]

Joel Krauska wrote:
> I've heard the GPL interpreted to say.
> 
> - You are only required to distribute source to the people whom you also
> distribute the binaries.
> 
> Thus, if you charge $1M for your binaries, there's no need to put up
> your sources on any public website as long as you provide the sources to
> the customers who buy your binaries.
> 
> (this doesn't restrict that customer's ability to turn around and
> provide the sources to anyone for free)
> 
> 
> Is this nuance what you folks generally consider?

Yes, that is the correct interpretation.

Tony

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20070226/a73757f2/signature.pgp