Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!intelca!mipos3!nate
From: nate@mipos3.intel.com (Nate Hess)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Reply to: mega-flame on GNU & Unipress
Keywords: GNU copyleft
Message-ID: <2227@mipos3.intel.com>
Date: 15 May 88 19:47:07 GMT
References: <8804300706.AA08462@EDDIE.MIT.EDU> <1092@mcgill-vision.UUCP>
Reply-To: nate@mipos3.intel.com (Nate Hess)
Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 22

In article <1092@mcgill-vision.UUCP> mouse@mcgill-vision.UUCP (der Mouse) writes:
>People are willing to pay for a polished, "friendly",
>and "helpful" editor.  As far as I can tell, you aren't allowed to
>charge for modified versions of GNU, (though you are allowed to charge
>for making the modifications, or for just the modifications...I think).


My understanding of the GNU copyleft boils down to this: You can charge
for modified versions of GNU.  You can charge whatever you want.
However, if the person/company that acquired the modified version from
you requests it, you have to send them machine-readable source code for
GNU, as well as any and all modifications with which you supplied them.
In addition, they are perfectly free to redistribute that version to
whomever they so desire, at whatever price they wish, (including free)
without notifying you.

--woodstock
-- 
	   "How did you get your mind to tilt like your hat?"

...!{decwrl|hplabs!oliveb|pur-ee|qantel|amd}!intelca!mipos3!nate
<domainish> :   nate@mipos3.intel.com		ATT :    (408) 765-4309