GPL Discussion

Quote from Jobra

OpenSource must not always be free and it's also not the idea of GNU GPL that everything must be free.

(...)

Source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.de.html

(...)

If you don't agree with that: enter JoomISP in google and download it from any warez site you find. I don't care about that.

Also you should read the GNU GPL carefully before saying that other people don't know what it is (see above).

Display More

LOOL!! That is really funny! At least you all know what GPL is in first place? Do you really want to take this to a lawyer? I already fight in court because a peace of software that was under GPL and the autor was selling it! And i won it!

And by the way, you give us a link to GPL, but i think you didn't read it so i will just copy/past those lines that can be found on the 10th topic:

Quote

You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.

So has far of my understanding of the law, you are in your right to charge for any support you give to a customer, but the software has to be distributed freely. You cannot distribute it only if a customer buy your support. And that also breaks the GPL license on point 1 (packaging).

Quote from Nuxwin

The guy is entirely right here. GPL don't mean for free. If I want, tomorrow, I can modify a single file of Debian and re-distribute it by asking some money.

That's not completely true. GPL allows the billing for a copy of the material when you buy that material from someone (ex: any media support or the redistribution of the rewrited material that was paid before you change it), and give the portion of your selling to the autor. So, if you want to sell copy's of your material, you have to license it under other kind of license because GPL is not for you.

So finishing my point, im interesting in your software and want to test it because in some future maybe i will create or not a hosting server. But, i won't pay for a copy of it or any service that is in the "package"... Maybe if i create that hosting server i will pay for support, or not! Im a coder myself, i can fix things when they are not right. Anyway, i won't pay to test any software. I could take this to any lawyer and under the international law force you to distribute the software freely, but in other hand, if i do that, you can change the license in just some hours and that leaves me without nothing.

So, read again the GNU GPL, and take it to a lawyer if you want to understand it... but if JoomISP is under that license you have to distribute it out of any package.

Quote from xclanet

LOOL!! That is really funny! At least you all know what GPL is in first place? Do you really want to take this to a lawyer? I already fight in court because a peace of software that was under GPL and the autor was selling it! And i won it!

I would be interested in more information about that judgment. What exactly was the violation of that author?

The FAQs to the GNU GPL answers the questions we are discussing about - in my opinion very clear.
The following quotes are from: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gp…html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney

Quote

Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site?
Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide “equivalent access” to download the source—therefore, the fee to download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.

Quote

Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me? (#DoesTheGPLAllowRequireFee)
No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the definition of free software.

The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a fee for doing so.

I don't require anyone who did receive the software in any way (e.g. from a friend) to pay me a fee. So no violation here.

Quote

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?
No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.

This is exactly the case for me.

Regards
Jonas

Please, read again your definitions... you are contrarying yourself:

Quote

Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me? (#DoesTheGPLAllowRequireFee)
No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the definition of free software.

The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a fee for doing so.

I don't require anyone who did receive the software in any way (e.g. from a friend) to pay me a fee. So no violation here. -> You are requiring to pay you a fee for the software because you are selling a "package" where the software is. To not break this rule you have to provide the software to be freely available separately from your "support package".

Quote

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?
No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.

This is exactly the case for me. -> Again, this is not you... because you are already breaking the GPL by including GPL'd software into a "package" that has to be paid.

Anyway, i can mail to GPL and they will analyse your casis... but im pretty sure that you'll have to make the software availlable separately from your "support package" to not break GPL.[hr]
Also, normally (as mentioned in the above license), you'll have to create some complementary parts on the GPL license, for that to be allowed. (That's what joomla did 2 years ago, and because of it, many "bridges" where shutted down because of it)