[glass-]

My favourite part of the GPLv2 is the torrent technicality[0]. I wonder if all those people seeding Linux distributions realise they're violating the license.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#BitTorrent

[dijit]

That says they only need to link to the sources somewhere in the torrent.

[glass-]

Are we reading the same thing? It says:

> The best way to make sure you are in compliance when distributing GPLv2 object code on BitTorrent would be to include all the corresponding source in the same torrent

Not a link to the source, the source code itself.

[dijit]

I'm two lines down.

> section 6(e) of GPLv3 is designed to give distributors—people who initially seed torrents—a clear and straightforward way to provide the source, _by telling recipients where it is available on a public network server._ This ensures that everyone who wants to get the source can do so, and it's almost no hassle for the distributor.

[glass-]

That paragraph has no relevancy to the GPLv2, it is pointing out how they fixed the problem in version 3.

The Linux kernel is still licensed under GPLv2.

The differences between v2 and v3 is the entire context of this thread, so I believe you're deliberately being obtuse.