8 ms·
You're misunderstanding Author releases software version A under GPL, source code and a binary. Anyone can do anything they want with A under the terms of the
by dtech 7y ago
You're misunderstanding
Author releases software version A under GPL, source code and a binary.
Anyone can do anything they want with A under the terms of the GPL.
Author releases software version B. People cannot force him to release source code just because A was released under GPL.
Even if he says B falls under GPL but hasn't released the source code (yet), people at most can say he did not comply with the terms of the GPL and refuse to treat/use it as such , which means they cannot use or redistribute it since that is not allowed under normal copyright rules. It cannot be used to force the author to release Bs source code.
- jnbiche 7y agoI agree completely with your interpretation of the GPL. However, from my limited understanding, it seems that the situation in question was indeed about a "version A". I'm not suggesting the author can't release a future version under another license, or none at all. Of course he can. I'm saying, if he releases version A under the GPL, he has to comply with the terms of the GPL for that release. In any case, I'm no fan of the GPL, so it's no sweat off my back. But I don't understand someone releasing a software version under a certain license and then getting upset because someone asks him/her to abide by the terms of that license.