Re: [tlug] GPL non-sense

[Kenneth Burling <burlingk@example.com>]

On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Edward Middleton
<edward.middleton@example.com> wrote:
> On 09/25/2010 07:37 PM, Shawn Brown wrote:
>>> And that's a problem how? If it's based on your source you should still
>>> have your original version.
>>
>> I do have the original but that is not entirely the point.  If they
>> improve my original, I want to be able to use that too.
>
> Then you are using the wrong license.  The GPL only gives the recipient
> the rights listed in the GPL not the creator of the original work.
>

Honestly, unless they are distributing it outside of their company,
there are no licenses that come immediately to mind that would compel
them to share their own changes.

If, and only if, they are distributing the software outside the bounds
of the entity that is their corporation, then they have to make the
sources available.  They do not however have to make it easy for
people to undo their changes.  That is the point of open source. You
change the code to suit your needs.  If that means you have to
untangle the pieces you don't want to get at the ones you do want,
then so be it.  That is up to you to decide if it is worth your time.

If they are only using it internally, then most open source licenses
don't give a flip.  They address how they got the source, and how they
can distribute it.  Everything in between is their concern.