Approval for Introducing Your Software in Japanese PC magazine

[Colin Law]

On 28 April 2013 14:48, John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Graham Leggett <minfrin at sharp.fm> wrote:
>
>> On 28 Apr 2013, at 04:45, John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:
>>
>>> The rules say that you have to distribute all of the source code, but I think that it's become
>>> pretty common to rely on the fact that the sources are all readily available via the net. You'll
>>> probably want to get an OK from your lawyers.
>>
>> The rules say that if you make changes to the code, you must make those changes to the source available under the same license.
>>
>> If you don't make changes to the code, for example you just publish the binaries as provided, then just link back to the source here.
>>
>> The source doesn't need to be on the same physical medium, but does need to be available. An example might be binaries on an operating system CD, with source available via the operating system website.
>
> Wrong.
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#TOCUnchangedJustBinary

Just to clarify that, I don't think it means that you have to supply
the sources on the same medium at the same time, just that you have to
be able to supply the sources if someone requires it.  If I get a
Ubuntu CD from Canonical (a CD not a download), which includes
gnucash, they do not have to supply the source at the same time.  It
has to be available if I ask for it however.  Also if I insist on
getting the source on CD then they can make a reasonable charge for it
I believe.

Colin