Re: More FSF hypocrisy

[Hyman Rosen]

Rjack wrote:
> "That argument simply doesn't hold water. Covenants to offer source
> code in this and such a way are not "scope of license", they're
> return consideration.

Of they are not - the offer of source is not to the rights holder,
it is a condition of the permission to distribute.

Do you think that quoting someone else who is wrong will help you
make your (incorrect) case?

> The GPL is a true offer of bilateral contract.

No, it's a one-way license from the rights holder to the person who
wishes to copy and distribute the covered work. The distributor owes
nothing back to the rights holder provided that distributes the work
properly as required by the GPL. This distribution is to whomever he
wishes; if he provides a copy of the sources upon distribution, he
is free from any further obligation. The rights holder could not demand
a copy of the source from him.