[Ilugc] Question about GPL violations [closure]
- From: lawgon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kenneth Gonsalves)
- Date: Wed Feb 13 14:43:27 2008
On 13-Feb-08, at 2:41 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On 13-Feb-08, at 1:31 PM, S.Ramaswamy wrote:
This is not a requirement of the GPL license. They only need to
supply
source code to those they have provided binaries. Public
distribution of
source code is never mandated by the license.
Correct. I think it's the act of distribution that makes the GPL
kick in.
if you distribute to even *one* person, anyone else is also
entitled to ask for the source - not just that one person
If a person gets a source, he or she is free to distribute the
source to other people. However distributing a source to one person
does not automatically entitle other people to demand the source
from the originator providing the binaries.
from the gpl faq:
What does ?written offer valid for any third party? mean in GPLv2?
Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed
program no matter what?
If you choose to provide source through a written offer, then
anybody who requests the source from you is entitled to receive it.
If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with
source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to
distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially
redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass
along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did
not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of
the source code, along with the written offer.
The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party
is so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can
order the source code from you.
--
regards
kg
http://lawgon.livejournal.com
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
Foss Conference for the common man:
http://registration.fossconf.in/web/
Other related posts:
