re: licensing question

Peter:

> What you *could* do, however, is to create a per-CPU support contract
> *without* delivering the software. Or make two contracts of it: one
> for delivering the software under GPL terms, and a per-CPU support
> contract.

What my support contract *may not* do, if the GPL means anything at all,
is assert that merely by copying and installing a GPLed program I have
somehow used the support provider's services. 

Whatever one *could* do, I would not suggest really creating a per-CPU
support contract because how could it possibly be enforced?   When
you get an issue report from a support customer, how do you know (and
why do you care) on which machine the issue arose?

Rather, support should be sold like a metered utility (like
electricity):  You can pay simply for actual usage.  The provider
only has to guarantee a supply up to a certain amount.  If you
are worried that you'll have spike demands that exceed the default,
you can pay a retainer fee in return for which the support 
provider guarantees you a higher level of potential "issues per
minute".  To sweeten the pot, the provider could make promises
such as that under-utilized retainer fees are, in part, redirected
to making general improvements to software or to R&D.

-t