X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<4F6B5A7E.9040200@laserlinc.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:59:42 -0400
From:	Joshua Lansford <Joshua DOT Lansford AT laserlinc DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] use-license: unlimited, dist-license: GPL
References:	<4F6A36A5 DOT 10807 AT laserlinc DOT com> <201203212124 DOT q2LLOCgh028905 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <4F6B0AAA DOT 5010406 AT laserlinc DOT com> <201203221655 DOT q2MGtcwI010683 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<201203221655.q2MGtcwI010683@envy.delorie.com>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Thank you sir.
~Joshua

On 03/22/2012 12:55 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Now ... what about this ... is sending pdfs of the schematics out for
>> quote by board houses considered a distribution?
> I think any time the symbol/footprint is not "extractable" you're
> clearly in the use-license case.  The grey area is if you distribute a
> *.sch file, from which a symbol could be extracted.  The clearly
> dist-use case is distributing the symbol and/or library on its own.
>
> My personal opinion is, if it's in your schematic, it's use-license.
>
>> I would think not because it understood that they won't keep the
>> schematic for their own purposes.  Thus we aren't "selling" the
>> schematic just the boards.
> Money has no bearing on how the licenses are applied.  The GPL only
> cares about "distribution".
>

- Raw text -