Re: Question on GPL compliance
* Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060119 17:15]: Suppose I have an online store that sells CDs of GPL software. People buy the CD and we ship it to them. One obvious way to comply with the GPL is to always send a second CD with the sources. Now, here's another idea. Suppose that when the user clicks buy they get a message: would you like the sources CD? (extra $2). If they click yes we package it too. If they click no we don't, and never again have to worry about the sources because we did give them a chance. And because the offer was for a CD, it is an equivalent medium. In your non-lawyer opinion, is this an appropriate use of the GPL? I doubt it, as you are selling the CDs and not the service of copying CDs. (Though the latter case most propably only make the situation more complex.). So the is made by offering access to copy does not help as someone pointed out. Without the extra $2 I could imagine something like Your buy includes an extra source CD. If you want to not get it sent, we will recycle the CD by trying to sell it someone else. Do you want us to throw it into the recycle bin on your behalf instead of sending to you?. Though the lawyers and judges would surely find some problem with that, too. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Question on GPL compliance
Hi all, I'm looking for ways to comply with the GPL without the 3-year requirement (I don't know where I'll be in 3 years). Suppose I have an online store that sells CDs of GPL software. People buy the CD and we ship it to them. One obvious way to comply with the GPL is to always send a second CD with the sources. Now, here's another idea. Suppose that when the user clicks buy they get a message: would you like the sources CD? (extra $2). If they click yes we package it too. If they click no we don't, and never again have to worry about the sources because we did give them a chance. And because the offer was for a CD, it is an equivalent medium. In your non-lawyer opinion, is this an appropriate use of the GPL? Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Daniel Carrera writes: Hi all, I'm looking for ways to comply with the GPL without the 3-year requirement (I don't know where I'll be in 3 years). Suppose I have an online store that sells CDs of GPL software. People buy the CD and we ship it to them. One obvious way to comply with the GPL is to always send a second CD with the sources. Now, here's another idea. Suppose that when the user clicks buy they get a message: would you like the sources CD? (extra $2). If they click yes we package it too. If they click no we don't, and never again have to worry about the sources because we did give them a chance. And because the offer was for a CD, it is an equivalent medium. In your non-lawyer opinion, is this an appropriate use of the GPL? Section 3 of the GPL does not seem to permit that: If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code. Shipping a CD is not offering access to copy from a designated place, so an equivalent offer is not relevant. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Michael Poole wrote: Section 3 of the GPL does not seem to permit that: If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code. Shipping a CD is not offering access to copy from a designated place, so an equivalent offer is not relevant. Alright, thanks. I guess we'll ship two CDs then. I am very risk adverse and I don't want to worry about the sources. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
But you know? This also affects selling CDs at a conference. If you are at a confernece giving out CDs, you are not offering access to copy. So giving them the option to burn a source CD for them wouldn't count. Correct? Daniel. Michael Poole wrote: Section 3 of the GPL does not seem to permit that: If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code. Shipping a CD is not offering access to copy from a designated place, so an equivalent offer is not relevant. Michael Poole -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Daniel Carrera writes: But you know? This also affects selling CDs at a conference. If you are at a confernece giving out CDs, you are not offering access to copy. So giving them the option to burn a source CD for them wouldn't count. Correct? I would distinguish that case by the cost. If your web site has a checkbox that the user can check to receive the source CD at no additional cost, then I think your situation would be the same as the situation at a conference. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Michael Poole wrote: I would distinguish that case by the cost. If your web site has a checkbox that the user can check to receive the source CD at no additional cost, then I think your situation would be the same as the situation at a conference. At the conference I would be giving the sources CD for the cost of the media ($2). Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Daniel Carrera writes: Michael Poole wrote: I would distinguish that case by the cost. If your web site has a checkbox that the user can check to receive the source CD at no additional cost, then I think your situation would be the same as the situation at a conference. At the conference I would be giving the sources CD for the cost of the media ($2). The GPL only explicitly permits this for the three-year written offer case. Perhaps suggest that GPLv3 allow it? Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
On 1/19/06, Daniel Carrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Alright, thanks. I guess we'll ship two CDs then. I am very risk adverse and I don't want to worry about the sources. Even if you feel under obligation to do what the GPL decrees, your customers can of course make a promise not to come back to you later asking for CDs with sources when they expressly don't want that accompanied CD. regards, alexander.
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Michael Poole wrote: The GPL only explicitly permits this for the three-year written offer case. Perhaps suggest that GPLv3 allow it? The three year offer is precisely what I'm trying to avoid. I don't know where I'll be in three years, and I don't want to worry about being able to provide sources for a CD I gave or sold 3 years before whose contents I wouldn't remember. Cheers, Daniel. -- /\/`) http://oooauthors.org /\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org /\/_/ \/_/I am not over-weight, I am under-tall. / -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question on GPL compliance
Michael Poole wrote: The GPL only explicitly permits this for the three-year written offer case. Perhaps suggest that GPLv3 allow it? I agree with Daniel that it would be sensible to permit this, and I've actually made this suggestion already on their rather cool commenting webtool. Here's the thread if anyone wants to chip in: http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/readsay.html?id=201 Gerv -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
