[wellylug] Linux as selling point.

[Simon Antliff]

On 8/7/05, Jethro Carr <> wrote:
> I see where you are coming from, but this is classified as a violation,
> as the finished product (which includes the Linux binaries) is being
> distributed outside of the company, which is non-internal distribution.
> 
> It's like the cases where companies power routers with Linux, and don't
> include the source. Exact same thing.
> 
> If the product was only used by their employees, it would not be a
> violation.

Found this quote here
(http://www.misticriver.net/boards/archive/index.php/t-5218.html):

"I asked some guys from iRiver dev zone and apparently the linux
kernel is unchanged, their properity apps just interface to the kernel
hence not having to GPL the source code."

I can't verify this though.
Isn't it enough to provide a reference to the source's location, not
the source itself? So iRiver could just say, source available at
kernel.org?

Simon