Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:45:41 -0800
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        "Jeffrey Goldberg" <jeffrey@goldmark.org>, =?iso-8859-1?B?S/Z2ZXNk4W4gR+Fib3I=?= <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Licensing question about GPL/LGPL binaries
Message-ID:  <001201c757f0$2ba91fa0$3c01a8c0@coolf89ea26645>
References:  <45DED5B6.9020309@t-hosting.hu> <CC493214-CE69-49D6-AF00-C3D62CF8780C@goldmark.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeffrey Goldberg" <jeffrey@goldmark.org>
To: "Kövesdán Gábor" <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu>
Cc: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Licensing question about GPL/LGPL binaries


> [freebsd-emulation cut from cc]
>
>
> On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:53 AM, Kövesdán Gábor wrote:
>
> > The question is that can we extract and provide these binaries in a
> > simple tar.gz file or is that considered a GPL/LGPL violation? The
> > sources are freely available on slackware.com, but we are not sure
> > doing so is legally correct. What do you think about this?
>
> Gábor,
>
> What you plan to do is perfectly fine under the GPL as long as
>
> (1) What you distribute is under the GPL license
> (2) You let people know where they can freely get the source
> (3) You don't take credit for work that isn't yours.
>

Jeffrey,

  Kovesdan is not modifying the binaries or the sources, thus there is no
need for him to GPL license his distribution - the files in his distribution
already carry their own GPL license.  He just needs to include all of the
files, which by GPL requirement, are going to include a copies of the GPL
licenses that are applied to those files, as well as instructions as to
where
to get the sources.  He does not need to further apply some kind
of 'overall' GPL license to his distribution.

  It's a similar issue as someone running an FTP server with GPL software
on it, they are merely serving as a venue for the distribution.

  It's a fine point to be sure, but an important one espically as the FSF is
aiming to have multiple, incompatible, versions of the GPL floating around.

Ted




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001201c757f0$2ba91fa0$3c01a8c0>