Re: What is source ?

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> Now if the licensor did not even give the licensee source code, the
>> "konkludentes Handeln" which would make the closing of a contract
>> conclusive did not even happen.
>
> Idiot. I don't need source code to enter into GPL contract with you
> by making available your GPL'd object code on my web site accompanied 
> by offer to get source code.

Where did that offer to get source code suddenly spring from?  Have
you finally realized that you were talking nonsense, and now
desperately try changing the scenario?

Anyway, any such offer would constitute an offer about getting source
code, not an offer about licensing it.  It would thus be completely
independent from the licensing under the GPL and not a "contractual
obligation" according to the GPL.

> I'll go after you to fulfill that offer.

In short: you finally agree that licensing source code and offering
access to source code are separate things, and the copyright holder of
GPLed source code is not obliged to provide copies when he has not
made an an explicit offer to do so.

Thanks for coming around after all this weaseling.  It is appreciated.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum