4 ms·

you are missing "... and not share the source code ..." in your question, which is clearly the context here.

• Tabular-Iceberg 5y ago
  If that’s the context, then what point is the statement trying to make? The addition of the code and the slapping of the price tag has no bearing whatsoever on copyleft compliance, and that you have to redistribute the source of the combined work along with the binary under a compatible license is just calling water wet.
  • hedora 5y ago
    You can do that, but you can't prevent the first person you sell it to from redistributing your additional code for free. This is basically Red Hat's business model, so making it work is possible, but they're effectively selling services, not software licences.
    • Tabular-Iceberg 5y ago
      That's what "redistribute the source of the combined work along with the binary under a compatible license" means. Still calling water wet.