"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 10:14:47AM -0500, Christopher Friesen wrote:
> > I think you should re-read the GPL. You only have to provide source to
> > people to whome you have distributed your new binaries, and you only
> > have to provide that source if you are asked for it. If you have some
> > code that you have written that is based on GPL'd code, and you are the
> > only person that ever runs the binaries, then there is no obligation for
> > you to make your code available to anybody.
>
> Depends on what terms the code is provided under. Using GPL code in a
> for profit enterprise and distributing it to customers does require
> that the changes be provided upon request. I have read the GPL, and
> I've had a lot of lawyers around here read and analyze it too.
>
> :-)
Well of course this is the case. I specifically said that I am the only
one that ever ran the binaries. Once you start distributing it to other
people, then they can request the source additions/modifications and you
are obligated to provide it.
Theoretically you could use software based on GPL'd code all throughout
a for-profit corporation and make boatloads of money using that
software. As long as you don't distribute it to customers outside the
company, and as long as none of the employees using it ask for the
source and distribute it outside the company, nobody outside that
corporation has any right to the source even though it is being used for
profit.
-- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 21:00:25 EST