X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:55:38 -0400
Message-Id: <201203221655.q2MGtcwI010683@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <4F6B0AAA.5010406@laserlinc.com> (message from Joshua Lansford on
	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 07:19:06 -0400)
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>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> 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".