On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:31:34 -0500, Carlos Villegas wrote: > On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:33:46PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > you're allowed to distribute the GPL'ed software. -- Or imagine you'd > > purchase a personalized copy of the software in binary form. The GPL does > > not cover whether you're allowed to redistribute that personalized binary > > version. -- Another example where you don't lose the rights in the source > > I'm not a lawyer, but that example (personalized binary) clearly would > violate the GPL, if the original code is GPL, then any derivative work is > GPL (personlized source that produced the binary), as such you are entitled > to that source and can redistribute it and modify it as you please. But the source code is available. The GPL has no requirements whatsoever that the program is shipped together with a complete set of tools that create the preconfigured, personalized, installable software. The GPL just requires that the complete source code for the program is made available, not that it is trivial or easy to rebuild the program. [1] Probably it didn't become clear what "personalization" means. It could be a digital key file, heavy preconfiguration or complex installation and set-up requirements. In either case, additional customization that is beyond the scope of the GPL. [...] [1] E.g. if a GPL'ed program is able to decode mp3 files, it need not include an mp3 encoder. Similarly, if a program at startup asks for a digital key file or serial number (which must be purchased), the source code need not include the tools required to create that input. --
Attachment:
pgp00005.pgp
Description: PGP signature
