Quoting Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult (enrico.weigelt@???):

> By selling, I mean, you'll first have to pay before you get the code.
> But anybody republish it at will (as long as complying to GPL), so
> how can that business model work ?

OK, let's say I just wrote a codebase and declare it to be under GPLv2
licence terms. I haven't yet put it up for download, but am willing to
give you a source code instance for €10. Please explain to me why I may
not offer to sell you that codebase.

Hypothetical #2. I find a copy of a very nice, fast, good-looking X11
(FLTK-based) MUA by Pim van Riezen named Post Office, that used to be
freely distributed on the Internet but has vanished after van Riezen
discontinued maintenance. I offer you a source code instance for €10.
Please explain to me why I may not offer to sell you that codebase.

(In fact, van Riezen used LGPL, and in fact I offer it free of charge
at http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/apps/postoffice/ , having saved it
from total oblivion.)

> Software *collections*, Distro. So, you're paying for the transport
> medium and the collection as a whole, not the individual packages.

FSF has for over 30 years _also_ sold individual GNU codebases. (I
mention that even though you've just made a distinction without a
difference.)

> Anybody can pick out individual source trees from commercial distros
> and redistribute them at will.

If they are open source, yes. (Some distros include proprietary
components that may not lawfully be redistributed at will.) But that's
not what you said, upthread. You suggested that one may not sell GPL
software. That is completely untrue, and has always been so.

I think you are perhaps confused about copyleft and how it interacts
with commerce.