Re: [Fsfe-uk] Re: Second revision of GPLv3 draft

[Alex Hudson]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 12:07 +0100, Sam Liddicott wrote:
> I worry that it may be convenient for the licensee to make such explicit
> arrangements with an inept and [especially] going-bankrupt operator in
> order to fulfill this requirement and yet restrict access to te source.
> 
> e.g. I contract with "my-little-brother inc." to make the source
> available, and immediately fulfil the clause. My little brother goes out
> of business and we both have a party the same day to celebrate our
> subversion of the GPL.

As I read it, the "as long as needed to satisfy these requirements"
basically only kicks in when you stop distributing the program: if you
continued to distribute the program, yet my-little-brother inc. was out
of business, you would still need to provide access to the source.

In other words, you couldn't distribute the GPL'd binaries and point
people to a defunct company to receive the source.

Cheers,

Alex.