2 GPLv3 docs: DRM and Patents

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > > Digital signature software like GnuPG might not be distributed
   > > as signed binaries under GPLv3 unless the archive signing key
   > > is included, by the looks of that, depending on what "unseal"
   > > means in court.  [...]
   > 
   > Why should a signing key have to be included? [...]

   To unseal the signature block.  As posted, it depends what "unseal"
   means in court.

The signature isn't blocking anything here.  You don't need the
signature to install and/or execute the program in question, so there
is nothing to `unseal'.  If a signature key was required to run and/or
install the program (license key, dongle, come to mind) then the key
would have to be included.

Cheers.