On Thursday 20 March 2008, Colin Guthrie wrote: > 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 If the code is "work for hire" and the initial ownership is with the client/company, then there is no distribution and so you are not required to do anything. That includes if you are a full time employee of the company. If the code you write is owned by you and given to a client, that is distribution. You can either give the client a copy of the source at the same time, in which case you needn't share it with anyone else, or say "you can get it from this FTP if you want", in which case anyone may access it because when the client distributes the "runnable version" of the code to someone else, they will also say "and you can get it from this FTP if you want". As PHP is its own source code, the latter is generally not an issue since the source code is provided automatically. So in the OP's case, if he takes an existing GPLed project, modifies it in whatever way (including removing mention of the original project), and gives a copy to his client, his only legal obligation is to provide the client with the code under the GPL so that the client can, if he wants, pass the code on to someone else under the GPL. "Someone else" could be a public FTP server or not. -- Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42 larry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ICQ: 6817012 "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas Jefferson -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
