GPL question

[Alejandro Imass]

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson <chris-E7bvbYbpR6jSUeElwK9/Pw at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2013, Scott Allen wrote:
>
>> On 7 January 2013 08:06, James Knott <james.knott-bJEeYj9oJeDQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> While I'm no expert, my understanding is if they use the device only
>>> internally no.  If they sell it, yes.
>>
>>
>> And, I believe, they only have to provide GPL'ed source to people who
>> buy, or otherwise legally use, the product (but there's nothing
>> stopping the user from redistributing the source).
>
>
>    If you distribute (give, sell, post on the WWW, etc.) the binary,
>    modified or not, you must also make the source available.
>

Absolutely, even if it's embedded in hardware. E.g. Sony has some DVD
players that include the GPL license in the user's manual and
instructions on how to request the software.

With GPL 2.x technically, you don't have to distribute the sources
bundled with the binary. You just have to make a prominent notice (a
README or LICENSE file would suffice) and make them available upon
request, possibly charging a small fee for the cost of distribution.
I.e. you don't have to make it available on-line. You can perfectly
charge a small fee to burn and ship a CD with the source code and have
the requestor pay the shipping and handling.

With GPL 3.x, if using the Affero variant, then even if the software
is used in a saas model over a network, enhancements to that software
must be made available upon request from a user. Even though it was
targeted for SaaS, I think GNU AGPLv3 also triggers strong copyleft
even if the software is only used in-house but I am not entirely sure
of this (who is the user in this case, the employees??).

Best,

--
Alejandro Imass
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists