I've done some digging around and; http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic
Says you're right, it does only need to go to users. However, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLCommercially is interesting in that it implies that the software can't be copy protected. And http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid implies that even if you get a copy of the app for free from another Android owner then you still have access to the code. So, in theory, you could download the app, email the APK to someone else, get a refund, and they would still have a claim to the source code. Very interesting. Al. --- * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * ====== Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sean Hodges Sent: 15 April 2009 17:51 To: [email protected] Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics I think the key here is that the GPL does not (and as a license cannot) dictate WHO you distribute to. It only dictates HOW you are allowed to distribute when you do. The passage you quoted Al, is stating "All third parties" meaning "all recipients of this software". Unfortunately this is not clearly stated in the definition section, but it has no legal standing to mean anything else. A license only has jurisdiction within the distribution from the licensee to the recipient. As an example: Google use modified versions of the Linux kernel in their server clusters, but I'm fairly certain they don't contribute back all of those changes. They are not obliged to just because Linux is freely available. Of the changes that they do contribute back, most would be voluntary because they want the changes in future releases. This story would be different if they sold people Google Search Appliances with modified Linux kernels and no corresponding source code, but they could still potentially put the source code on a CD and just hand it out to the people that bought the device. I'll re-iterate that I am not a lawyer, but I find this discussion very interesting. If someone does consult a lawyer or the SFLC, I'd like to hear the response. On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > There's a difference between not distributing at all and distributing > it even if it's not directly to me. > > Section 2 (b) of the GPL v2 reads; > > "You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole > or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part > thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties > under the terms of this License." > > Which I take to read that the developer shouldn't even be charging for > the binaries. > > From my recollection this requirement for derived works to be "at no charge" > (i.e. free) was the reason the LGPL was introduced for code libraries > so that they could be used in commercial products. > > Al. > > --- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Disconnect > Sent: 15 April 2009 17:10 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > > > GPL covers redistribution - if you don't have the new bins, nobody has > distributed it, and it does not apply. > > (That, indirectly, leads to one of ESR & co's big complaints - I can > create a webapp under the gpl and never, ever release sources unless I > distribute the app. To pick on our hosts :) google groups could be > entirely based on GPL software, and until/unless they bundle it in an > appliance or something, we'd never even know much less be able to get > code.) > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Does it?, I'm not required to have the binary in order to get > the original source code, so wouldn't it be an additional requirement (i.e. > against the GPL), to say I need it for the Android port? > > Al. > > --- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ > <http://andappstore.com/> * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp > House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and > not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or > it's > subsidiaries. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Disconnect > Sent: 15 April 2009 15:03 > > To: [email protected] > Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > > > > That license only applies when you have the binary already. So > "prove you legally acquired the binary" is a legitimate question. (And > "oops I didn't see your email yesterday" covers the 24h return period > as well. The GPL doesn't require you to be instantly available 24/7.) > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Al Sutton > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > As far as I know he can't demand to see payment before > handing over the > source code. > > From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL; > > "The distribution rights granted by the GPL for > modified versions of the > work are not unconditional. When someone distributes a > GPL'd work plus their > own modifications, the requirements for distributing > the whole work cannot > be any greater than the requirements that are in the GPL." > > So due to the original Doom source code being freely > distributable and > usable the author can't add on the requirement that I > pay for the > application. > > > Al. > > --- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at > http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales > with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is > Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the > author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Sean Hodges > > Sent: 15 April 2009 14:16 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > > > Rapidshare? :) > > The developer is allowed to sell GPL software, he just > has to provide the > source code to the people that have the application. > With that in mind, he > may demand proof of payment before giving you his > latest source code. > > I'd imagine it wouldn't be too much work to take a > recent Linux port of the > Doom engine (like PRBoom) and modify the code to use > Android compatible > libraries. The interesting bit would be getting the > native C engine working > in an APK. I'm not sure how that is done, perhaps > someone else might be able > to shed some light on it? > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Al Sutton > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Any way you know of getting the APK without paying > the $3.99? > > > > Al. > > --- > > > > * Written an Android App? - List it at > http://andappstore.com/ * > > > > ====== > > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & > Wales with the > > company number 6741909. The registered head office > is Kemp House, > > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > > > The views expressed in this email are those of the > author and not > > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > associates, or it's > > subsidiaries. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Sean Hodges > > Sent: 15 April 2009 12:55 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > > > > > > Ah, I see :) Well it may not be available on-line. If > not, you should > > request it directly from the developer by email (the > GPL only demands > > that the source is made available on request). I'd be > interested in > > how you get on obtaining the source, as I might ask > for a copy myself. > > > > It's worth checking the contents of the Doom APK file > as well, the > > source code may have been bundled in the archive. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Al Sutton > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I think you missed my point :), The GPL means the > source of the > >> *Android > >> port* needs to be available. If it is it'd be a > great project for > >> potential game devs to cut their teeth on. > >> > >> Al. > >> > >> > >> --- > >> > >> * Written an Android App? - List it at > http://andappstore.com/ * > >> > >> ====== > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & > Wales with the > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office > is Kemp House, > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > >> > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the > author and not > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > associates, or it's > >> subsidiaries. > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Sean Hodges > >> Sent: 15 April 2009 12:09 > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > >> > >> > >> Al, > >> > >> The source code is available on id's FTP server: > >> > >> ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/ > >> > >> As I said, this excludes the game data, as that is > still under a > >> commercial licence. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Al Sutton > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_source_port > indicates the Doom > >>> source code is GPLed which means that the source > should be freely > >> available. > >>> > >>> Has anyone seen it? > >>> > >>> Al. > >>> --- > >>> > >>> * Written an Android App? - List it at > http://andappstore.com/ * > >>> > >>> ====== > >>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & > Wales with the > >>> company number 6741909. The registered head office > is Kemp House, > >>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > >>> > >>> The views expressed in this email are those of the > author and not > >>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > associates, or it's > >>> subsidiaries. > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [email protected] > >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Sean Hodges > >>> Sent: 15 April 2009 11:23 > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Developer Ethics > >>> > >>> > >>> I don't see why not, ethically... Assuming he/she > ported it, > >>> packaged it, and paid for the market account to > publish it. The > >>> textures and game data are not covered by the GPL > license I believe, > >>> so he may need permission from id Software to sell > that (don't take > >>> my > > word on that). > >>> > >>> Of course, whether it's a popular decision with the > target audience > >>> is a different issue altogether :) Also, someone > else could legally > >>> package Doom and distribute on the market for free, > effectively > >>> stealing the customer base. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Al Sutton > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> What do people think of the developer selling his > Android port of > >>>> the shareware version of Doom for $3.99 on Market? > >>>> > >>>> Al. > >>>> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> * Written an Android App? - List it at > http://andappstore.com/ * > >>>> > >>>> ====== > >>>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & > Wales with the > >>>> company number 6741909. The registered head > office is Kemp House, > >>>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > >>>> > >>>> The views expressed in this email are those of the > author and not > >>>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > associates, or > >>>> it's subsidiaries. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
