Re: gpl license definition of distributing

From: Grant Edwards (grante_at_visi.com)
Date: 07/21/04 

Date: 21 Jul 2004 16:26:30 GMT

On 2004-07-21, Martin Hansen <mah@cccfsi.dk> wrote:

> But what about embedded SW?
> example:

> I put some GPL software in a piece of hardware (like a washing machine).
> This hardware is protected so the user won't have access to the software
> only the functionality.
> I sell this hardware.
> Now have i distributet the software?

Yes.

> as the user does not have access to the software!

I don't know what "access" has to do with it. You've shipped a
binary copy of a GPL program to somebody else. They are
therefore entitled to source. I don't think the GPL contains
any exclusions tothe source provision based on the type of
medium used to distribute the binary.

> You could claim that as I am selling the hardware I sell and
> thereby distribute the SW.

That's certainly the way I see it.

> But what if I only rentet out the HW.

How the hardware is paid for doesn't matter. If you send
hardware containing the program's binary to somebody else, then
you've distributed the software.

> Would that not be like people using my website for a fee?

No. The people who use your website to not get copies of the
binary for the web server.

> And if realy this is a distributiuon and i have to provide
> source.

Correct.

> I could put the source into my hardware, becuase I
> have now delivered the source on the same medium as the
> executebels.

I don't think that satisfies the GPL. It must be in a machine
readable format in a form useful for somebody who wants to make
changes to it and build a new binary.

Have you _read_ the GPL?

http://www.fsf.org/licenses/licenses.html

Your questions are all answered there.

You have to provide the source code in a usable, ma

> But my customor have no access to either.

If you ship binaries of GPL programs in your device, you've got
to provide source code. Period. 

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  I'm thinking about
                                  at               DIGITAL READ-OUT systems
                               visi.com            and computer-generated
                                                   IMAGE FORMATIONS...

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... because the Hardware *ISN'T* ... hardware that was designed for the end-user to modify. ... compliance with the GPL. ... For those who are not willing to abide by the spirit of the license, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... That's the hardware imposing a restriction on modification of the ... GPL will be amended as needed to plug such holes. ... a right to modify that copy. ... But you get the TiVO corporations copy of the software? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... hardware is not free. ... TiVo is imposing an artificial restriction on ... If the restriction is in the source code of the program, ... And I have no *GPL* claims to my laptop either. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Ubuntu is not free.
    ... It takes time to develop and some manufacturers doesn't release their ... time they can handle it well on GPL. ... that a hardware manufacturer has decided that getting the customer to ... customers demand they do so or they will take their business elsewhere. ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... the GPLv3 *compels* a critical authorization decision to ... Which is totally alien to everything in the GPLv2, word and spirit. ... hardware was *never* a right granted by the GPL, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)