GPL compliance

[ubuntu at rio.vg]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
>
>>  If the user wanting the source code doesn't have access to
>> the internet, that's his own problem.
> 
> I disagree. If a user got Ubuntu (or any GPL software) on CD and
> has no Internet, why should he be forced to buy something (Internet
> access) just so that he can make use of his rights? That doesn't make
> sense to me.

You have the GPL backwards.  The *user* doesn't have the right to the
source code.  Instead, the *distributor* is required to provide the
source code.  Do you see the difference?

The GPL, simply put, is a set of requirements that a distributor must
meet before the software can be distributed.  It is not a set of user
rights.

> Now, if Ubuntu would NOT be shipped on CD, then I might agree
> with you. But Ubuntu is officially available on CD.

There is no requirement in the GPL that the medium of distribution and
source availability be identical.  The only requirement is that it be
"on a medium customarily used for software interchange", and be provided
at cost, or less.

Is it "nice" and "proper" for ubuntu to send out source code CDs?
Absolutely.  The legal requirement, however, is satisfied by making the
sources available for download.