5 ms·

> he's not in any position to be asking for the source code People keep repeating this, but I'm pretty convinced that clause 3b of GPLv2 says that the source c

by jordigh 11y ago

> he's not in any position to be asking for the source code People keep repeating this, but I'm pretty convinced that clause 3b of GPLv2 says that the source code must be given to any third party, since 3a and 3c do not apply: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11218324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11218324

edent 11y ago
I agree. It's also possible, I presume, to hire a car for the day. You don't need to be the owner of the vehicle, surely?
- lmm 11y ago
  The whole point of the GPL is to give you the right to fix or improve software you own. It would be extremely rude to reprogram a rental.
  - edent 11y ago
    Depends. Would it be rude to inflate an under-inflated tire? Or to wash the windscreen? Or tighten a loose bolt somewhere? I mean, you're right - it's impolite (and possibly dangerous) to reflash someone else's firmware. But considering the regular upgrade path for BMWs is to stick a USB stick into the car, I'm not sure how you can prevent it. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-software-updates-unencrypted/ https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-softw...
    - joezydeco 11y ago
      IMO modifying a car you don't own would seem to be illegal, no matter how easy or hard it is to do. You wouldn't go and start swapping out engine parts, would you? Why is ECU firmware any different?
      - paulddraper 11y ago
        "I made a few adjustments to your brake lines, and I improved your steering system -- I call it 'natural' steering because it works the opposite direction."
- mkesper 11y ago
  I'd think you'd really have to but only lawyers could say something legally convincing about this.
lmm 11y ago
The intent of the "any third party" language is that someone who receives a copy under 3c can invoke the offer. The offer must be valid for him, but unless he received the written offer (e.g. by buying a second-hand BMW from someone who distributed the software in accordance with 3c) he has no real business taking it up (and while BMW must honour their offer if he happens to make the correct request, they have no obligation, legal or moral, to help him make the request the correct way).
- DannyBee 11y ago
  No, that's not the intent. At all. In fact, this is covered square on by the GPL faq: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenO... "What does “written offer valid for any third party” mean in GPLv2? Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter what? (#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid) If you choose to provide source through a written offer, then anybody who requests the source from you is entitled to receive it."
  - lmm 11y ago
    From your own link: "The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party is so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can order the source code from you." So yes, that is the intent.
    - DannyBee 11y ago
      Sigh. Look. they have bad grammar, but i'm telling you what the intent is. Please read the GPL compliance guide: https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-guide.html https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-gu... The example valid offer: "... This offer is valid to anyone in receipt of this information." "Second, note that the last line makes the offer valid to anyone who requests the source. This is because v2 § 3(b) requires that offers be “to give any third party” a copy of the Corresponding Source." This changed in GPLv3, which specifically mentions people who possess the object code instead. It was changed explicitly, see the rationale for the third discussion draft of the gplv3.

by jordigh 11y ago

edent 11y ago

I agree. It's also possible, I presume, to hire a car for the day. You don't need to be the owner of the vehicle, surely?

lmm 11y ago
The whole point of the GPL is to give you the right to fix or improve software you own. It would be extremely rude to reprogram a rental.
- edent 11y ago
  Depends. Would it be rude to inflate an under-inflated tire? Or to wash the windscreen? Or tighten a loose bolt somewhere? I mean, you're right - it's impolite (and possibly dangerous) to reflash someone else's firmware. But considering the regular upgrade path for BMWs is to stick a USB stick into the car, I'm not sure how you can prevent it. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-software-updates-unencrypted/ https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-softw...
  - joezydeco 11y ago
    IMO modifying a car you don't own would seem to be illegal, no matter how easy or hard it is to do. You wouldn't go and start swapping out engine parts, would you? Why is ECU firmware any different?
    - paulddraper 11y ago
      "I made a few adjustments to your brake lines, and I improved your steering system -- I call it 'natural' steering because it works the opposite direction."
mkesper 11y ago
I'd think you'd really have to but only lawyers could say something legally convincing about this.

lmm 11y ago

The intent of the "any third party" language is that someone who receives a copy under 3c can invoke the offer. The offer must be valid for him, but unless he received the written offer (e.g. by buying a second-hand BMW from someone who distributed the software in accordance with 3c) he has no real business taking it up (and while BMW must honour their offer if he happens to make the correct request, they have no obligation, legal or moral, to help him make the request the correct way).

DannyBee 11y ago
No, that's not the intent. At all. In fact, this is covered square on by the GPL faq: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenO... "What does “written offer valid for any third party” mean in GPLv2? Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter what? (#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid) If you choose to provide source through a written offer, then anybody who requests the source from you is entitled to receive it."
- lmm 11y ago
  From your own link: "The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party is so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can order the source code from you." So yes, that is the intent.
  - DannyBee 11y ago
    Sigh. Look. they have bad grammar, but i'm telling you what the intent is. Please read the GPL compliance guide: https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-guide.html https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-gu... The example valid offer: "... This offer is valid to anyone in receipt of this information." "Second, note that the last line makes the offer valid to anyone who requests the source. This is because v2 § 3(b) requires that offers be “to give any third party” a copy of the Corresponding Source." This changed in GPLv3, which specifically mentions people who possess the object code instead. It was changed explicitly, see the rationale for the third discussion draft of the gplv3.