Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

On Tuesday 28 July 2009 22:12:44 Simon Jenkins wrote:
> He  
> SHOULD have licensed his modifications under the GPL but he DIDN'T  
> (remember?) which means you don't have a license for the modifications.

Where do you see this breaking down?

Let's take a few made up examples:

I write a program from scratch. I compile it and release the binary only but
claim the program is under the GPL.

Is it? Can anyone force me to give them the source? Can anyone "de-compile"
the binary and release that source under the GPL?

Say instead, I start with a the GPL source to a program you wrote, I modify it
and release the binary under the GPL. When asked for the source I refuse and
possibly claim the dog ate it. Is my modified program under the GPL? Does my
making the claim about the dog matter at all? Since I claim the binary is
GPL, can you legally "de-compile" my released binary and put appropriate GPL
notices on the resulting source?

Are there any other cases that need to be considered?

all the best,

drew
_______________________________________________
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 04:15:08 2009