LOL, you're so hypnotized you don't even know what you're talking about. Or worse.
The terms of the license are, if you "redistribute", you have to release the source code to anyone that asks for it. ANYONE. Read the terms of the license itself, Section 3, I guessed you missed it while you were gobbling up the propoganda (FAQ).
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html
That's why all these Red Hat knock offs exist. They have to give their source code away since they are selling the software, and alls these copies spring up. Talk about the bottom of the food chain, a knockoff of a knockoff.
But the Chicoms rename theirs "Red Flag" and use it to run their supercomputers, and who could blame them, they get their copies of GNU Linux for free, practically straight from the US DoD now it sounds like.
And here you are, unable to even properly spout the terms of the license they do this with, but still trying to defend it.
Exactly. If you redistribute it. If you do not, you are under no obligation to give any source code to anyone. Ergo, if I wish to create my own Linux distro to use in a simulation, I don't have to give it to, show it to, sell it to, lend it to, or rent it to anyone. Show me, in a cut-and-pasted quote, with a link (rather than your typical whiny lying) where it says otherwise. You can't and you know it, Buzzy. Give it up before you sound even more foolish.
"And here you are, unable to even properly spout the terms of the license they do this with, but still trying to defend it."
Nice try, but you're still a moron. There was no "spouting"...my irrefutable proof was cut and pasted directly from the FSF's site, the same one from which you posted a general link and gave me a vague excuse about section 3, which had nothing to do with anything.
If you have a problem with FSF's interpretation of GPL, maybe you should take it up with them. They know more way more about it than you do, despite your weak protests to the contrary.
Wanna try again, missy?