Re: [tlug] GPL and Open Source Licences

[Niels Kobschaetzki <niels.k@example.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 31 Dec 2004, at 12:28, simon colston wrote:

>
> Pietro Zuco wrote:
>> On Friday 31 December 2004 09:57, simon colston wrote:
>>> If I link to some GPLed code I understand that I have to licence my 
>>> code
>>> under the GPL too.  If I then distribute my program I understand 
>>> that I
>>>  also have to distribute the source code as well.
>
>> So, you can for example sell the program and sell the source code. 
>> It's logic, because provide the source code have a cost for you and 
>> maybe you can't affront it.
>> But this don't mean that the source is secret!
>> After, someone else, can sell the program again, or modify it. The 
>> source code have to be available in some way. For example you can 
>> sell the source code, but after I can copy it to my friends or sell 
>> it again.
>
> OK, so let's say I sell the program and the source to one customer 
> under the GPL.  I understand that under the GPL the customer *can* 
> copy, modify and make the source public but is that customer _obliged_ 
> to do so?  Can the source be kept secret between me and my one and 
> only customer for this program? Or, can anyone write to my customer 
> and force them to give them a copy of the source because it is 
> licenced under the GPL?
>
> I can see that the GPL is great for a program with many, many users. 
> You create a community around the program and everyone contributes, 
> more eyes looking for problems is a good thing.  But when a program is 
> written specifically for use by one user/organization only, then there 
> are very few benefits in that program being licenced under the GPL.  
> In my opinion the source *should* be made available to the 
> user/organization who are using the program - if they decide they 
> don't like me they can get someone else to fix their program in the 
> future - but making the source public serves no purpose at all, as far 
> as I can see.

when i remember right, then is the right license for this purpose the 
bsd-license. you can show everyone you want the source but when your 
customer brings additions in it, he/she has not to open it to the 
public.
am i right? unfortunately i have right now not the time to check it...

- --
Is your Linux cute?
貴方のLINUXはかわいいですか？
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFB1T1sYHHhPwEHb0ARAvNpAJsEhBk6nXKLkjpjjexzFRi+nRiJBACeKiIr
gxcLKQ0jQ2sUv35TSaJm/fM=
=yUAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----