Re: GPU and GNu Octave

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 1 November 2012 01:44, Matt Nicholas <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 10/31/12 11:30 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>>>
>>> 2) distribution of a binary inside a company, including between various
>>> company sites, is not distribution from the point of view of GPL.
>>
>> Doubtful and misguided.
>>
> Not to stir the pot...
> and I'm not a lawyer....
> and I realize that as you said, email lists are poor places to get legal
> advice....
> but which part of this is wrong?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#InternalDistribution
> Seems pretty clear on this issue, and to support the assertion above.

I suppose I could be mistaken, but it seems to me like an employee
within the company could assert that her employer or colleague gave
her a GPL-violating binary and demand her GPL rights or notify the
author of the GPL-covered work of a copyright violation. I don't see
in the language of the GPL anything that grants a special exemption to
such internal distribution. Admittedly this is pretty far-fetched.
This would require to have an internal conflicting relationship within
the company. I surmise the above response in the FAQ was assuming such
a relationship does not exist.

But, I could be mistaken, I'm not a lawyer, etc.

- Jordi G. H.