TorPark mentioned on BoingBoing

Geoffrey Goodell goodell at
Wed May 10 11:23:05 UTC 2006

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 02:46:57AM +0100, Arrakistor wrote:
> Roger,
> At the bottom of the page is the download for the source code. In that
> tarball is the licenses.
> Also,  inside  each  distribution  of Torpark I have also included the
> licenses.
> > I see that there's a link to a source tarball at the bottom of
> > but a) I don't see a license for Tor there,
> > and b) just copying the licenses for software that is released under the
> > GPL is not sufficient to follow those licenses. You need to follow section
> > 3 of the GPL: the simplest approach in my opinion is to make the complete
> > source code available for download from the same site as the binary.
> I  am confused as to your suggestion on part 3 of the GPL. You suggest
> I  make  the  source  code  available, as though it was not; yet right
> above  that  sentence  you tell me that you've seen the source tarball
> there. This already conforms to 3(a), does it not? Or do you suggest I
> once again add the source code to each download?

The objection is that providing a link is not enough!  Roger may decide
to release Tor under a license that does not require him to provide
source.  Roger may stop providing Tor entirely.  The site may crash,
change location, or creash.  The site may be inaccessible to users
accessing your site as the result of filtering.  Most importantly, Roger
WILL change the source code in later versions of Tor, such that the code
available from that link is insufficient to compile the Tor that you
provide.  The list of reasons goes on and on.  You must re-publish the
source; providing a link, though easier, is insufficient to satisfy your
GPL burden.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the tor-talk mailing list