In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Eric writes: >> If i start off with a copy of the 2.4 linux kernel downloaded from >> kernel.org and then modify it (a lot) and only use it "in house" and dont >> release it (give away or sell) in any form to the general public or any >> other entity outside my company, does the GPL require me to publish my >> source code to the world?
>The GPL never requires you to publish your source code to the world. That's true in the direct sense. However, there can be a impetus for it to occur indirectly because the GPL gives anyone you transfer the code to the right not only to modify it, but to distribute it as they see fit. So for example you cannot make an company that you give GPL code to sign an NDA no the redistribute it. Once they get GPL'd code, they can publicly distribute it, even if you do not. I see it all as very simply: if you want to keep code to yourself then do not use GPL code (with the one exception of in-house usage only). In every other instance where distribution occurs, the GPL is virtually designed to trigger widespread distribution. So if you don't want that, then why use GPL code or attempt to distribute it? BAJ _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
