Re: GPL and inhouse use?

[David Kastrup]

"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org> writes:

>    > Pointing out views which have no relation to my opinion about
>    > whatever matter is Terkhovian.  This wasn't about redistributing
>    > in-house programs, it was was redistribution of _public_
>    > programs.
>
>    No, it wasn't.  It was about in-house programs used for providing a
>    public service.
>
> "I was answering a specific concern `code that offers a service to the
> public'."
>
> No, nothing in-house in there.  I'd quote more parts, if I could find
> the old message.  Please read, please follow the thread, please stop
> being a jack ass.

Since you are incapable of using your Usenet client (why does this not
surprise me?), here is the relevant article (and please notice the
subject line which is still in every posting of the thread):

    Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
    From: Merijn de Weerd <merijn+nospam@realemail.net>
    Subject: Re: GPL and inhouse use?
    Message-ID: <slrne6ir6u.27j.merijn+nospam@athome.nowhere>

    On 2006-05-16, Eric <nospam@email.com> wrote:
    > Merijn de Weerd wrote:
    >> Suppose you add a lot of code to implement a really robust and
    >> unique embedded software stack that makes a great product. You'd
    >> want to keep that proprietary to prevent your competition from
    >> gaining the same advantage that you just worked months or years to
    >> create. Yet, you have to share if you build upon GPL software.
    >> The same should apply to the in-house environment you describe.
                                    ^^^^^^^^
    >> 
    > so its basically "if i modify any gpl'd code I must give away my changes
    > whether or not i keep it 'in-house' "?
                               ^^^^^^^^^^

    Right now the GPL makes a distinction for in-house code. Only
                                              ^^^^^^^^
    if you distribute binaries do you have to share the source. I
    was just saying that that should change: also in-house code
                                                  ^^^^^^^^
    should be shared, once it's out of testing.

[...]

Somebody with a bad memory like that should get a Usenet reader
capable of following a thread.  I recommend using Gnus.

And you really should cut down on your condescension and name-calling,
given that the thread topic is still in the subject line.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum