|
From: Nicholas Mc G. <der...@ho...> - 2015-11-06 01:27:02
|
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 07:02:39PM -0600, Jeff Epler wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 11:28:00AM -0500, Dave Cole wrote: > > GPL... ? As long as they state that they are not selling LinuxCNC, > > how could get they get trouble with that? > > Selling a PC with LinuxCNC preinstalled is "commercial distribution", so > absolutely they have to take several positive actions to be in > compliance with the GPL. See the GPL version 2 section 3. > > Yes, I know that as a matter of practicality nobody is going to 'get > these guys' for copyright infringement, whether of LinuxCNC or Mach or > any other software. > If its a clear violation I would not ignore it and ask FSF/FSFE for their opinion and/or support. If the violation is due to them not providing a suitable written notice /media or appropriate license to those they handed the software on to then this is something that can be resolved and if the companies in violation get notice from the right place (like the FSF) they might well be willing to comply - I would assume that most such violations are ignorance more than intent. Pleas do not just ignore such cases if they can be documented clearly. thx! hofrat |