[vox] What is GPL "Distribution"?

[Micah J. Cowan]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 12:26:10PM -0400, Mike Simons wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:18:41AM -0700, Micah J. Cowan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 08:20:09PM -0700, Bill Kendrick wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:38:56PM -0700, Jeff Newmiller wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  a) My company asks me to install a kiosk in our front lobby.  I modify
> > > >     GPL code to get it working.  Is physical access to a device
> > > >     implemented with GPL'd tools by the public considered "distribution"?
> > > 
> > > I think so, hence the source-code releases by folks like TiVo and
> > > Dish Network.
> > 
> > But you actually *buy* TiVo, etc. He's talking about physical access,
> > but not ownership; not even leasing. I don't think there's a court in
> > the world that would rule this to be "distribution."
> 
>   In the example above, I have trouble seeing how that is considered
> distribution.  However, if the same kiosks started appearing in starbucks 
> or public libraries... I have trouble seeing how that is not
> distribution.  Even if the company still "owns" the kiosks and is 
> only renting use of them to the locations involved.

I still wouldn't consider that distribution, but I would definitely
see how a judge might. Of course, I'd personally be happier if it was
ruled to be distribution...

-Micah