On Wed, 2004-12-15 at 20:07 +0100, Christian Frisson wrote: > What is the difference between this case and the "hi-jacked" Audacity versions > that used to be sold on eBay under another app name? Fervent Software's product is a Linux distribution. A more closer analogy would be "What is the difference between this case and Red Hat selling their distribution?". GPL doesn't prohibit selling the software, though it's more probable that the license does not prohibit selling media containing the software. Thus, allowing Red Hat and Fervent Software (+a few others.. :) to sell GPL software. The "restriction" is that the source code for the program must be available. This doesn't really apply to most distributions as the source code is compiled as it is, so the source is found on the original website/ftp site/etc. (Though, many distributions do provide "source" CD/DVDs) This "source code must be free" restriction also applies to any modifications made to the (distributed) software. So, any patches (in the case of eBay audacity, the name changes) must be provided with the software or available free somewhere. >From what I know the other significant relevant restriction in the license is that the GPL must be included with the software and clearly stating that the software in question is licensed under GPL. *Disclaimer* IANAL. The GPL is a complicated beast. There are a lot of clauses in the license. This is not even a simplified version of the license. This covers only a small (but significant) part of the license, which I haven't read (I wouldn't understand lawyer-talk anyway). If you know better, correct me. :) Sampo
