question about the GPL

[Robert L Krawitz]

#include <std/disclaimers/ianal.h>

   From: Frank Ramsay <fjr at marsdome.penguinpowered.com>
   Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 13:45:49 -0400

   A CEO-worker of mine asked me a question about the GAL the other
   day, I didn't have an answer for him, and now I'm wondering what
   the answer is myself.  Since I can't read legal-speak to save my
   life I'm going to ask here as well as struggle through re-reading
   the GAL.

   It took a while for me to understand what he was asking, so I'll
   try and spell it out in baby steps:

   Company A:
   1:  Writes a new super useful program for Linux..
   2:  Decides to GPL the source code.
   3:  Makes the source code available on their website.

   The question was, can company A restrict distribution of _pre-compiled
   binaries_ of the program?

Company A, as author of the program, can put any restrictions they
please on the distribution of their own program.  If they incorporate
someone else's changes, though, it's another matter.  So I presume
you're talking about a situation where they're using (at least in
part) somebody else's GPL'ed program.

   To put this another way.
   A company produces a distribution of GNU/Linux
   it comes on 2 CD's
   cd1:  The install CD
   cd2:  _All_ the source.

   Can they restrict distribution of cd1?

I presume you mean restrict duplication of cd1?  Redistribution of an
original copy of cd1 is not covered by copyright.

   His point was they still have access to the source, they are still
   free to make and redistribute changes to the source and they are
   still free to make, redistribute, and sell variations on the
   program(s).  They just can't redistribute the binaries that company
   A itself produced.

Well, Section 3 reads:

	You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under
	Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
	Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the
	following:

As long as people distribute source according to one of the Section 3
subsections, then, they are permitted to distribute objects or
binaries.

Section 6 is the one that grants recipients their rights under the
GPL.  Therefore, people who receive binaries under the GPL are allowed
to distribute them according to Section 3, I should expect.

   I had always assumed the GPL would automaticly extend to the
   binary, but after talking with him I'm no so sure.  Does anyone
   know?

Section 3 is the one that covers object code or executables.

As a purely practical matter, this kind of thing might be hard to
enforce, because proving that the binaries are copies of the original
binaries (as opposed to ones compiled on an identical platform) would
be hard.  Of course, if the source distributed did NOT match the
binaries, then it would be easier to prove (the sources distributed
could not be compiled into identical binaries), but then there's the
little problem of Section 3 again, which requires complete source
code.

I don't understand why someone would want to do this, anyway, unless
the intent is to distribute source that doesn't match the binary.  I
can see this being used to try to get around the GPL, by making the
(hidden) compilation environment part of the compilation source, but
there would be a very strong argument that the details of the
compilation environment (which might include machine names, source
directories, environment variables, IP addresses, and so forth) *are*
part of the source.

Again, if Company A is releasing their own program, there's no issue;
they can release it under any terms they please.  I don't see why they
couldn't put terms in the license agreement that read:

1) You may not distribute the contents of cd1 without our permission.

2) You may distribute the contents of cd2 under the terms of the GPL.

That's because it's their own program, so they hold the copyright.  If
someone else holds the copyright, and licenses it under the GPL, then
Company A probably can't play those kind of games.
-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).