2009/10/15 <[email protected]> > @turkingor > I am pretty sure you can have your intended deal with the customer. > > It is related to GPL (v2,v3) conditions carefully crafted by Richard > Stallmann, not that much of what Tiny says about it. > > Intention by RS was not to force you to distribute your work, but to deny > you attaching strings to it. If you give somebody right to use your work, > you must give HIM full rights. There is no requirement to publish or > shareback (contrary to popular belief). > However, if you want to publish your work (to a lot of persons) then you > must give the freedoms to the same lot of persons (usually everyone). > > > Options which are pefectly legal under GPL are: > - you can develop derivative work and licence it to noone else. Noone can > force you to publish your in-house openERP solution. You can have contracts > with your employees or consultants that they can not use this code > themselves. (or face criminal charges for leaking Your intelectual > property). If your customer is very concerned about "leaking" then you > should have contract with him that you develop solution for him, not you > licence your work to him. > - you can have specific industrial app based on OpenERP. You can still sell > it to a few customers, and NOT publish it to anyone else. Catch is that your > every customer has GPL on your solution - so they can do anything (like > publish or resell) with solution. They are too binded by GPL, so everybody > they give the work will have the same freedom. > > If company A has their Solution (purchased from you or developed > themselves) the Solution is protected just as anything else. If free-minding > employee of company A will publish the Solution, the employee or > unsuspicious users of Solution would violate law. Because it is Company A > who "owns" rights to Solution and only they can decide if they want to > share. >
I dont know if the employee violate law if copyrightis maintained nothing happens. The employee has freedom to share if he wants. > > > > May be I am wrong, but this is what I read in GPL. If there is different > interpretation (with links to binding GPL text, not arguing ethics here) I > would like to know. > > > > > -------------------- m2f -------------------- > > -- > http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=45286#45286 > > -------------------- m2f -------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > Tinyerp-users mailing list > http://tiny.be/mailman2/listinfo/tinyerp-users > -- Cristian Salamea CEO GnuThink Software Labs Software Libre / Open Source (+593-8) 4-36-44-48
_______________________________________________ Tinyerp-users mailing list http://tiny.be/mailman2/listinfo/tinyerp-users
