GPL question

[Alejandro Imass]

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Dave Cramer <davecramer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Alejandro Imass <aimass-EzYyMjUkBrFWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>> 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:
>> >>>

[...]

>> >    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??).
>>
>>
>
> When you say binary are we talking the proprietary code or just the GPL code
> ?
>
> Dave
>

AFAIK it breaks down somewhat like this:

1) Proprietary code can link with GPL code only if the GPL code is
LGPL. Even "intimate" relationship/use is considered "linking" so
there is on-going debate as to what is considered "linking". In the
Linux Kernel for example there has been long-going controversy as to
how proprietary drivers could work with the Linux Kernel. Some
clarifications from Torvalds and initiatives like the Linux Driver
Project have dealt with these issues, actually "working around" the
GPL and some still insist it's illegal under GPL terms. If I remember
correctly, the issue was the actual linking of the drivers to the
kernel and there is some technical discussion there

2) Binary code can be proprietary or not. If it links with GPL code or
uses GPL code you must make all sources available of all GPL code that
your program uses, and you must also make your code available unless
everything you use or link with is not LGPL. That's why many companies
choose BSD-style licensed code instead. With BSD there are fewer
restrictions on making your stuff closed.

3) Binary code can be distributed without source code but you must
always make the source available for anyone that uses your code.
Again, that is in the case that your binary uses or links with ANY GPL
code (not LGPL-only). For example the binary RPM packages are
proprietary to RedHat in the sense that they consider their
compilation and tweaks (their distro as such) to be a trade secret.
Hence they will not disclose how they make it all fit together, but
they are forced to release all the source rpm packages. That's how
distributions like CentOS can basically clone RHE without making that
illegal. In fact some people actually use illegal copies of RHE and
use yum to install CentOS packages, I find that stupid (and probably
illegal IMHO) and they should be using CentOS altogether instead.

If you are planning to release commercial closed products that use
Open Source in general you should consider hiring a lawyer to review
every single piece of code you are using. In our company we were
actually surprised at the level of expertise in Open Source licenses
you can find in small and medium-level law firms in Canada and the US,
it's actually quite common!

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