Unsure of GPL privilege to distribute
the_Arioch at nm.ru
Fri Mar 6 02:44:26 CET 2009
В письме от Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:58:20 +0300, Stephan сообщал:
> I'm smarter now and will be careful to always base future software
> on at least one GPL library to force GPL conveyance.
As far as i understand, that does not give you what you want.
Even if youd try fraud like developing critical libs in free time as a
lone rider, them publishing uner GPl, then downloading from work in work
hours as a worker.
It is rather a blocker stone.
Follow me and try to catch the flaw (btw, i think GPL2 ann GPL3 may be a
bit different in what situation belongs to each cass):
1) you use the Lib, copyight on which belongs to Bob and he gave it to You
2) as an employee, You right the program Pro to the Company
3) You heavily modify the Lib and then use it in the Pro.
3.1) By modifying the Lib, You created the "derivative work", and the Pro
would be treated as such
3.2) Would you use the Lib unchanged, GPL would have no any effect on the
Pro, since the package Pro+Lib would not go as single atom, but tather
than "mere aggregation" and only the Lib must go onward under GPL
4) You quit the company
5) You, now as a by-stander, request the sources
...on what grouns?
a) Did you received the copy of the Pro as a by-stander from the company ?
Since the Company did not distributed/conveyed anything to You, it is in
no way bound by GPL wrt You.
It did not gave You the Pro as binary, it has no reason to give You it as
b) However, would the company ever want to distribute/convey the Pro to
someone Pete (it migh be You even, or anyone else), then the Companny
would be bound by GPL wrt Pete.
And the Pete would have the right to request sources and request them
covered by GPL.
b.1) The company might agree on that, to protect it's right to distribute
the Program. Happy bells ringing. At that time Pete has full GPL program
and in turn might decide (or might not - it's his choice) to distribute
the Program to You under GPl.
b.2) The company might deny source request. Only at this moment GPL comes
into game. Only at this momen it becomes active. The facts of
distribution+source denial tgether (and only together) makes a GPL
violation, the company looses all grants to the Lib and the Pro becomes a
pirated soft. The company has no more rights to distribute it to nowhere.
b.2.1) In theory, the Company also lost any ights to use it in within. In
practive, by simply downloading new copy of Lib and recompilig the Pro
they again re-obtains all the GPL rights.
c) But if the Company had no intention to distribute it to anyone and is
happy enough just to use it close within, or just delete it, then it (in
effect) is not bound by GPL.
Используется революционный почтовый клиент браузера Opera:
More information about the legal