On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 12:30 -0500, Jim Capp wrote: > Steve, > > I'm confused. Isn't the code that was developed related to the JIAX > already GPL and therefore should be returned to the community anyway? > > Jim
The GPL *only* covers distributed works. If the company that paid for the work did not distribute it they dont have to give it out. Further if they distribute it, and it is GPL they would only have to give the code to the people they distribute it for. You could do the same with the GPL version of asterisk (not to be confused with the closed source commercial version digium sells). You could sell it for whatever you want and someone is willing to pay. You would only have to give your changes (if any) to the people that you sold it to. Just because its GPL does not in any way mean the community will ever benefit from people modifying it, all the GPL does is place restrictions on developers in how they can and cannot use the code. This is a common misconception about the 'freedom' that the GPL provides, mostly because 'freedom' is defined as 'restrictions'. Further the GPL only covers *copyrightable* work, it does not include anything covered by trademark law or patent law. While it was not implicitly stated prior to GPL3, it would be possible to GPL patented work meaning that no one could use it outside of research and development (generally) without paying a license fee. GPL3 states that if you contribute code then patents must be licensed to all (there are legal circles currently discussing the verbage, gpl3 is banned at some companies because its vague, it could mean that if you have any gpl3 product you entire patent portfolio is fair game for anyone else to plunder even if the patents had nothing to do with gpl3 software - linus had some bad things to say about the gpl3, richard stalin retorted saying that you should never use linux ever - google for cites there are many). This is similar to the discussions that resulted in the banning of gpl1 software - such as GCC because it was vague if you compiled a program that the output of gcc, namely the binary makes it gpled. GPL2 was formed to clarify that (per stalin's comments at the time). I know that I worked with a company long long ago whose extensive legal department came to the conclusion that no gpl software could be used due to the ambiguities in the gpl1, they changed their minds when the gpl2 came out, but by then it was too late (back then GCC and suns commercial stuff were not anywhere near as compatible as they are now). -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel Belfast +44 28 9099 6461 US +1 516 687 5200 http://www.trxtel.com the phone company that pays you! _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
