I don't get it

I don't get it

I don't completely understand what all this is about:

1. Considering storebought Linux (e.g., the Red Hat 5.1 retail box with CD-ROM and book I purchased in 1998), the included media contains both binaries and source. Is/was the 3-year clause of GPL 3b satisfied right then and there with my purchase?
2. How come I can't find source ISO torrents on Fedora's download page? I don't mean to sound condescending, but it seems that if Fedora is having to tap-dance around a legal matter to comply with GPL 3b when handing out media in person, then they'd be consistent wherever they're making available the software¹.
3. Why doesn't Fedora just simply give away two DVD-ROMs, one install disc and one source disc, when the ambassadors hand them out? Yes, I know that this incurs more costs, but it'd still be cheaper than going through the bureaucratic process mentioned in the e-mail to accommodate those who request source media and have to wait for the ambassador to create a disc on demand. And, it'd be cheaper than facing the wrath of the FSF for GPL 3b non-compliance. Perhaps the ambassadors could put a positive marketing spin on the philosophies of the GPL by having to provide both binary and source at time of distribution - the recipient has complete freedom to review, modify, or enhance the software given to him/her.
4. Why not just eliminate some bloat such that the binary and source fit on one DVD? Okay, that was a cheap shot, but Slackware 12² binary and source both fit on one DVD (but you don't get GNOME or OpenOffice).

Thanks for any clarifications!

¹ I did find source .iso and .torrent files for both Fedora 7 and 8 on some randomly-chosen FTP mirror. But that was about six mouse-clicks away (on a non-Fedora site).

² Disclosure: I'm a satisfied Slackware user. My comments aren't meant to insult or demean the Fedora Project, or its software product, but instead to perhaps invoke discussion on why Fedora feels it must go through such pains to comply with the strictest interpretation of GPL 3b. In fact, I respect and admire Fedora for thoroughly analyzing the situation and developing a plan of action. I'll go admonish myself for the "bloat" comment, and then I'll research how many DVDs the latest release of Debian is up to. :-)

1) I don't see the relevance of a purchase of a ancient version of Red Hat Linux here but yes,
whoever you made the purchase from has to provide you the source code if a copy was not given
at the time of purchase. 

2) Fedora is pretty consistent in providing source code. In fact, Fedora does not even have a
non-free repository. You can find the complete source code in all complete Fedora mirrors and
the mirror list is indeed provided from the download page. You don't get direct links since
that page is already pretty crowded and people who want source code can easily find it. Sure,
it a couple more clicks but not a big deal and is a different ball game from distribution of
source code in media. 

3)The number of times anybody would ask for source code makes it cheaper to provide a copy on
demand compared to provide source code every single time. 

4)Fedora has about 10,000 packages in the repository currently and the complete binaries and
source code won't fit into a single DVD. Not even just the binaries would fit into a single
DVD. This really doesnt have much to do with bloat. Consider the case of a Fedora Live CD
which is probably the more popular means of getting Fedora in events compared to regular DVD's
and you can see why it wouldn't be possible to fit both binaries and source in a single disk. 

There is a significant difference between the cost of CD vs DVD media and especially CD vs DVD
writers in many regions. Read what you are replying to more carefully. I was referring to
"Live CD" and not DVD. There is no way to fit complete binaries and sources into a single live
cd. 

1) they're distributing under 3a) when you get both simultaneously. With this, the publisher's
obligation is complete.

3) Exactly because of the added cost, we made this recommendation.  We could double our
production and shipping costs to produce CD/DVDs with source code as well as the binary media,
but we know that at shows and events, most people are interested in getting the binary media,
and wouldn't want the source code media.  We would wind up throwing away a lot of source code
media, so, we incurred added expense, and have created more waste, for no tangible gain.

If in practice our Ambassadors are overwhelmed with requests for source code media at events,
we can reconsider this approach.

Written offer under 3b) has the problem Matt Domsch already cited which is a 3 year time
period for which you have to maintain the equivalent source packages. When exactly the clock
starts ticking for the 3 year time period is fuzzy and is a considerable risk if adversely
interpreted. 

Fedora Project having to retain all the binary and source packages for every update it has
every released (since different spins have different package sets and package versions) which
is a pretty huge amount of storage space considering the release and update cycle. A
comprehensive solution is being worked out on that problem as indicated in the announcement. 

https://fedorahosted.org/correspondingsource/