Larry Garfield wrote: > On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Colin Guthrie wrote: > >> Also as it's GPL and as you are "supplying" the modifications you make >> to your client, you are obliged to release the changes you make to the >> community. If this was a 100% internal development (e.g. you are >> employed directly by your client, not as a contractor), then you are not >> obliged to release the changes. > > Not true. If you take an open source project, modify it, and give a copy to > your client, you are under no obligation to give anyone else in the world a > copy of your modified code. What you ARE required to do is give that > modified to code to your client under the GPL so that he can, if he wants to, > share it with the world, and anyone he gives a copy to can also share it with > the world if they want to, etc. Is that true? I would have thought that by developing under contract and then subsequently "supplying" your modifications to your client, this constitutes "distribution" of the code. It is this "distribution" of the code that I've always considered the trigger for "having" to share it back to the community - e.g. if your changes are internal to your company you don't need to share it. Earlier I wrote that whether he was employed directly or as a contractor would have bearing and this statement was based on the above understanding. Am I wrong? Col -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
