[linux-audio-dev] GPL concerns

From: Shane <lists@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Wed Apr 06 2005 - 08:31:15 EEST

Hey everyone. I have a bland but important question for everyone. Say
hypothetically a company is developing an audio product using lots of
GPL source, but for whatever marketing reasons asks for NDA concerning
the codebase. Lots of GPL work is referenced and at least dynamically
linked, and though the company has directly stated that it will release
the codebase publicly with the product release (once it is complete).

I am curious as to the general feel in the community on such practices.
Would this 1) be a violation of the GPL, 2) if it is how tolerant would
the OSS community be, considering the general good intent of the
project, and 3) if I were asked to sign such a NDA would that document
be a binding agreement even if the NDA itself might be a violation of
the GPL since it is inherently counterintuitive to the intent of the
GPL.

Anyway, I know some of you have already been there with the fun NDA
stuff and thought you the best bunch of people to ask before getting
myself stuck in a NDA I am not completely comfortable with. The current
project cycle (hypothetically) is two years. I know this is happening
in the industry quite frequently already, but I am not sure I completely
agree or disagree with the practice (assuming the codebase does make it
into the public domain). On one hand I can sympathize with the
difficulties involved in bringing new products to market and how leaks
in early design phases can undercut profits enormously. On the
otherhand I would love to see more companies taking an open and
community approach to product development such as open ICs, and even
open business management. I am sure this would happen a lot more if
such efforts were a tax write off :), but then we live in the world we
live in.

Any thoughts, references to successful business models concerning
hardware development with free software, and legal cautions are all
greatly appreciated.

Yours truly,
Shane

PS I apologize in advance for any redundancy on this subject :).
Received on Wed Apr 6 12:15:07 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 06 2005 - 12:15:07 EEST