@@ -479,31 +479,31 @@ practice.
\chapter{Details of Compliant Distribution}
This section explains the specific requirements placed upon
distributors of GPL'd software. Note that this section refers heavily to
specific provisions and language in
\href{http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html#section3}{GPLv2}
and \href{http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html#section6}{GPLv3}.
It may be helpful to have a copy of each license open while reading this
section.
%FIXME-URGENT: integrate
with Section 1 is the source of the requirement that
the full license text must accompany every distribution of a source or binary
version of each licensed work, to ensure that users have actual notice of
their rights. This requirement is responsible for a surprisingly significant
fraction of compliance complaints, primarily because users are not provided
with required information about the presence of GPL’d programs and the
applicable license terms in physical products that they have purchased. The
most effective mode of compliance engineering is to treat the required
license texts as a ``make target'' in the compiling, packaging and distribution
of the software, so that license texts and other ``collateral'' for the
software in a product stack are produced and verified at the same stages and
in the same fashion that the binaries themselves are generated, tested and
packaged.
%FIXME-URGENT: END
Distribution of GPL'd works has requirements; copyleft will not function
without placing requirements on redistribution. However, some requirements
are more likely to cause compliance difficult than others. This
chapter\footnote{Note that this chapter refers heavily to specific provisions
and language in
\hyperref[GPLv2s3-full-text]{GPLv2\S3}
and \hyperref[GPLv3s6-full-text]{GPLv3\S6}.
It may be helpful to review \S~\ref{GPLv2s3} and \S~\ref{GPLv3s6} first,
and then have a copy of each license open while reading this
section.} explains some the specific requirements placed upon
distributors of GPL'd software that redistributors are most likely to
overlook, yielding compliance problems.
First, \hyperref[GPLv2s1]{GPLv2\S1} and \hyperref[GPLv2s4]{GPLv2\S4} require
that the full license text must accompany every distribution (either in
source or binary form) of each licensed work. Strangely, this requirement is
responsible for a surprisingly significant fraction of compliance errors; too
often, physical products lack required information about the presence of
GPL’d programs and the applicable license terms. Automated build processes
can and should carry a copy of the license from the the source distribution
into the final binary firmware package for embedded products. Such
automation usually achieves compliance regarding license inclusion
requirements\footnote{At least one COGEO recommends the
\href{https://www.yoctoproject.org/}{Yocto Project}, since its engineers
have designed such features into it build process.}
\section{Binary Distribution Permission}
\label{binary-distribution-permission}