"Vincent Rivière" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> The GPL states that if I distribute my projet under GPL, I must
>>> distribute the sources, too.
>>
>> The GPL states no such thing. If you distribute GPLed code from
>> somebody else, you have to heed the conditions of the GPL for the
>> complete product. But if you are the sole copyright holder, the GPL's
>> obligations are for redistributors, not yourself.
>
> Found on http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html :
>
> The GNU GPL demands that as soon as you distribute GPL licensed
> software in executable format you make available the "complete
> corresponding source code".
"GPL licensed software" means software licensed _to_ you, not _by_
you.
The GPL also contains the passage:
NO WARRANTY
11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO
WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE
LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT
WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT
NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE
QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE
PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY
SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
That means if the software is not fit for redistribution under the
GPL, you can't sue the copyright holder.
The only person with standing to sue anybody over non-compliance with
the GPL is the copyright holder himself.
There is a remote possibility that competitors might sue for
misleading advertising, but that is not really something to bank on.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
