Re: [LAD] Impro-visor source code and fork

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:31 PM, drew Roberts<zotz@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Sunday 19 July 2009 13:24:25 Paul Davis wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:59 AM, <laseray@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>> > To paraphrase the GPL, "the source code must be available along with the
>> > binary in the same/normal medium of distribution or a written offer
>> > (valid for three years) must accompany the distribution stating that the
>> > source code can be obtained, for a minimal fee".
>>
>> No, this *may not* not the case here.
>>
>> The GPL is a license issued by the copyright holder to others that
>> describes what they may do with the material and under what
>> conditions. The GPL license for the material does NOT apply to the
>> copyright holder. They may do whatever they want.
>
> I think you are correct in this and should this be considered a *bug* in the
> GPL? Should the GPL itself require the release of the source code by the
> original copyright holder as a condition of using the GPL in the first place?
>
> Also, if I as the original author release a program under the GPL but only
> supply the binary, doesn't that make things very tricky with people who might
> pass on the binary to others and their requirements to supply the source?

no, because if i supplied the program to them *UNDER THE TERMS OF THE
GPL* then i must offer them source.

the difference with being the original copyright holder (note the
singular) is that i could choose to offer it to them under some other
terms instead. they would then be prohibited (presumably) from
redistributing the binary i had given them.

--p
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Thu Aug 6 00:15:04 2009