Forrest J. Cavalier III wrote: > The Q Public license 1.0 (QPL), for exmaple, says something different. > QPL 4 b says you must give source code to "all recipients of a > binary", "without any charges beyond the costs of data transfer" > (which precludes a profit.) I think that is unfair. Consider that > I can decided to sell sources only at $50 profit. Company B takes > my sources, distributes executables, and then goes out of business. > Company C, who received binaries from B, now can come to me and > demand sources without profit. That's not fair, and I don't see > how it became OSI approved.
I don't think this is correct (however, IANAL). According to this clause in the QPL, Company B is obliged to distribute the sources to company C without any charges beyond the cost of data transfer *if* company C demands such sources. Since *you* have nothing to do with company C (their deal was with company B, not you), you are not obliged to distribute the source code to company C at all, whether or not company B goes out of business. Regards, Marc Rauw. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
