Re: scope of linux in the corporates...

girish wrote:

Their software *must* be released under the terms of the GPL,
definitely without question. if two things are the case:

1) The software is distributed, that is, somebody acquires a copy of
the binary code.

But note that if the software is not distributed outside the company the
source need not be made available to anyone.

I don't see why that would be true. As I read the GPL (and you must
comply with the GPL to acquire the right to create a derivative work),
anyone who gets the binary is entitled to the source, and anyone who
has the source can distribute it to anyone they choose (encumbered only
by the requirements of the GPL).

Please excuse my naïve questions.

What if - the developed software makes use of GPL libraries (the'libc) is
present in a ROM. Now the ROM is not exactly distributed standalone. Would
that still be considered as a Distributed Binary & that user has right to
claim the sources?

I wonder what would happen to my application, that I do not intend to give
away sources, which as network client downloads HTTP contents. Because I
am in no position dictate that the HTTP server must be a Non-GPL based.
There are certain decisions I need to make in my application based on
contents which are generated by Open Source HTTP server. Whether such
contents used in my application will be considered as derivatives of GPL
work & subsequently enforcing all those copyright and/or licenses on my
work as well?

Where does the line-of-control for GPL based work end in such cases?

At the risk of being flamed.
girish

Nicely on point. IF i were a judge i would not require that all source
running a GPL platform be released under GPL. I would only require that
part that is already under GPL and reasonably direct derivatives be
considered GPL; brand new code running on the platform coule be excluded.
Thus only the GPL part of the source to the whole site must be disclosed.

--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: scope of linux in the corporates...
    ... John Hasler wrote: ... binary code. ... AFAIK TIVO is written and executes on ... derivative of some previously existing GPL software? ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)
  • Re: scope of linux in the corporates...
    ... David Schwartz wrote: ... binary code. ... by the requirements of the GPL). ... you are violating the GPL. ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)
  • Re: scope of linux in the corporates...
    ... Now the ROM is not exactly distributed standalone. ... GPL) then it would be a distributed binary. ... in no position dictate that the HTTP server must be a Non-GPL based. ... A web page is almost certainly not a derivative work of the web server ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)
  • Re: scope of linux in the corporates...
    ... As I read the GPL (and you must ... Now the ROM is not exactly distributed standalone. ... in no position dictate that the HTTP server must be a Non-GPL based. ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)