Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
#include <std/disclaimers/ianal.h> From: Frank Ramsay <fjr at marsdome.penguinpowered.com> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 13:45:49 -0400 A CEO-worker of mine asked me a question about the GAL the other day, I didn't have an answer for him, and now I'm wondering what the answer is myself. Since I can't read legal-speak to save my life I'm going to ask here as well as struggle through re-reading the GAL. It took a while for me to understand what he was asking, so I'll try and spell it out in baby steps: Company A: 1: Writes a new super useful program for Linux.. 2: Decides to GPL the source code. 3: Makes the source code available on their website. The question was, can company A restrict distribution of _pre-compiled binaries_ of the program? Company A, as author of the program, can put any restrictions they please on the distribution of their own program. If they incorporate someone else's changes, though, it's another matter. So I presume you're talking about a situation where they're using (at least in part) somebody else's GPL'ed program. To put this another way. A company produces a distribution of GNU/Linux it comes on 2 CD's cd1: The install CD cd2: _All_ the source. Can they restrict distribution of cd1? I presume you mean restrict duplication of cd1? Redistribution of an original copy of cd1 is not covered by copyright. His point was they still have access to the source, they are still free to make and redistribute changes to the source and they are still free to make, redistribute, and sell variations on the program(s). They just can't redistribute the binaries that company A itself produced. Well, Section 3 reads: You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: As long as people distribute source according to one of the Section 3 subsections, then, they are permitted to distribute objects or binaries. Section 6 is the one that grants recipients their rights under the GPL. Therefore, people who receive binaries under the GPL are allowed to distribute them according to Section 3, I should expect. I had always assumed the GPL would automaticly extend to the binary, but after talking with him I'm no so sure. Does anyone know? Section 3 is the one that covers object code or executables. As a purely practical matter, this kind of thing might be hard to enforce, because proving that the binaries are copies of the original binaries (as opposed to ones compiled on an identical platform) would be hard. Of course, if the source distributed did NOT match the binaries, then it would be easier to prove (the sources distributed could not be compiled into identical binaries), but then there's the little problem of Section 3 again, which requires complete source code. I don't understand why someone would want to do this, anyway, unless the intent is to distribute source that doesn't match the binary. I can see this being used to try to get around the GPL, by making the (hidden) compilation environment part of the compilation source, but there would be a very strong argument that the details of the compilation environment (which might include machine names, source directories, environment variables, IP addresses, and so forth) *are* part of the source. Again, if Company A is releasing their own program, there's no issue; they can release it under any terms they please. I don't see why they couldn't put terms in the license agreement that read: 1) You may not distribute the contents of cd1 without our permission. 2) You may distribute the contents of cd2 under the terms of the GPL. That's because it's their own program, so they hold the copyright. If someone else holds the copyright, and licenses it under the GPL, then Company A probably can't play those kind of games. - Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |