linux-kernel - Re: Possible gpl problem?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1156763478.5340.70.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:11:17 +0100
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	David Rees <drees76@...il.com>
Cc:	Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...izon.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible gpl problem?

On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 00:22 -0700, David Rees wrote:
> Just because a company doesn't have source freely downloadable on
> their website does not mean they are violating the GPL even if they
> are selling GPL licensed software. Only people who buy the GPL
> licensed software are entitled to a copy of the source of the binaries
> they receive.

That's true _only_ if the company ships the source _with_ the binaries
when people buy the product.

There are two (commercial) options:

1. If you _always_ distribute source _with_ the binaries, then you only
have to give source to those who receive binaries. And of course you've
already done so.

2. If you ever distribute binaries _without_ source code, then you're
obliged to make the source code available to _any_ third party on
request; _not_ only those to whom you gave the binaries.

-- 
dwmw2

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/