RE: GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox +code

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

On Mer, 2004-11-10 at 09:27, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Let's slightly modify the parameters...

You've not "slightly modified them" you've changed the entire discussion
> 
> What if someone would offer you binaries (under the GPL) if you sign a contract
> that you will have to pay 100000 EUR (or 100000000 EUR, or ...) if you exercise
> your rights under the GPL?

This is unrelated. The GPL grants you the rights not to have to pay a
fee in order to exercise the rights under the GPL if you have the
binaries. (Or more accurately 'at cost' in some situations).

Consider the difference between these three statements and it might make
it clearer

1. "You must pay $1000 to distribute the source"
2. "I will pay you $1000 if you do not distribute the source"
3. "If you distribute the source then I won't supply you updates"

#1 places conditions on a GPL provided contract right which the GPL
prohibits
#3 is a discussion about matters entirely outside the GPL (and lawyers
who have looked at such things see no problem with it)

#2 Is interesting - its I think the borderline you intended to find, and
I'm not sure anyone could call it either way without being a qualified
lawyer.

Alan