Mail Archives: cygwin/2003/04/07/18:30:31
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:43:07PM +0200, Andrew Markebo wrote:
>/ Ronald Landheer-Cieslak <ronald AT landheer DOT com> wrote:
>| On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, nuno Cerqueira wrote:
>|> I would like to ask if there is any problem making the download of
>|> Cygwin packages to a CD and then distribute to students.
>| No, as long as you include the sources as required by GPL.
>
>The source isn't needed to be provided until asked for, so it doesn't
>need to be included on the cd's, as long as he can hand it out if the
>students asks.
This is incorrect information. The GPL is pretty clear.
Here's what it says:
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
It's not a "hand it out if the student asks" situation. The best you
could hope for in this scenario is option b) above. That would mean
that you'd have to give the student something written with the source
code and archive the source for three years in case some student decided
they wanted to take you up on the offer. Every software company that I
am aware of who distributes code under the GPL uses option a) because
archiving everything and keeping track of what binary CD relates to what
sources is too much of a pain.
For the record, I'm the head of the cygwin project. I am quite familiar
with the GPL but I would not anyone to believe that anything I say would
be legally binding. However, at the very least, the fact that I've
been involved in this capacity for 3+ years should account for something.
It should *at least* mean that random Joe user doesn't have to feel
compelled to fire off "clarifying" email on the GPL when I answer.
I'll try to make my role clearer in the future when I answer this type
of email.
The reality is that if you want real binding opinions you should contact
a lawyer. Although, even that opinion is, of course, subject to
interpretation until it is challenged in court. And even that...
cgf
Cygwin Project Leader
for Red Hat, Inc.
--
Please use the resources at cygwin.com rather than sending personal email.
Special for spam email harvesters: send email to aaaspam AT sourceware DOT org
and be permanently blocked from mailing lists at sources.redhat.com
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -