<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 30 July 2010 11:47, Robert Ladyman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:it@file-away.co.uk">it@file-away.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I'm cross-posting this as it involves a study with software that uses GPL<br>
software: there is a claim in the report that there is<br>
<br>
"nothing in [the GPL] that stops the software from being:<br>
<br>
* Given away, for free, without the source code (Freeware)<br>
* Given away, for free, with the source code (Opensource)<br>
<br>
It would, however, be contrary to the licence to sell the software without the<br>
source code."<br>
<br>
To me, this is a misreading of the licence - paragraph 5 in the preamble of<br>
the licence even gives an example: "For example, if you distribute copies of<br>
such a program, whether gratis or for a fee....", etc.<br>
<br>
The section is in the first part of the report.<br>
<br>
Am I correct?<br>
<br></blockquote></div> Here is an interesting blog regarding source code and licenses<br><br><a href="http://mjg59.livejournal.com/126162.html">http://mjg59.livejournal.com/126162.html</a><br><br>Gordon<br>