nominal charge [Re: No copyright information in executable]

[Luis Villa]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Ben Bucksch
<ben.buck...@beonex.com> wrote:
> In any case, I am not offended by "only the receiver of the binary", but by
> the "nominal charge", given my bad experiences with international payment.

The nominal charge language was inspired by GPL's similar language[1],
and it was intended to be read as a limitation on "reasonable means".
In other words, we wanted to ensure that the "reasonable means" was
not "oh, it's totally reasonable - you just pay me $1,000" - it is
supposed to set an upper bound and reinforce the "reasonable"
requirement, not imply that a nominal charge is always OK.

Luis

[1] In GPL 2, "for a charge no more than your cost of physically
performing source distribution"; in GPL 3 "for a price no more than
your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of
source".