4 ms·

That language seems to exist only in GPL v1. It is also part of a list of 'or' options. You can abide by one of the other options and not need to adhere to thi

That language seems to exist only in GPL v1. It is also part of a list of 'or' options. You can abide by one of the other options and not need to adhere to this one.

teddyh 7y ago
No, that language is in both GPLv1 and GPLv2 (in GPLv3 it’s “anyone who possesses the object code”). Yes, it’s one of a list of alternatives. The GPLv1 and GPLv2 sole applicable alternative to the written offer is to send the source code together with the compiled code; i.e. to all customers, in the box. Which they presumably didn’t do, so I don’t know why you bring it up. (GPLv3 adds the allowable alternative to point to a web page or similar where the source code may be downloaded. I.e. you don’t have to waste money by shipping a CD, you can just print the URL on a note or in the manual. But this was the GPLv2, not v3, so it’s not applicable here, nor has anyone said that any such URL was provided.)
- pricechild 7y ago
  My mistake, you are right in that the same language appears in v2. My point is that the op commented: > No part of the GPL, as far as I'm aware, requires distribution to anyone who isn't a customer. ...and I am agreeing to this position, against fuzzyh. Specifically "anyone" != "any third party" != "any third party... unless you've abided by a) or b), which don't require distribution to 'anyone' either."
  - teddyh 7y ago
    But it’s obvious that neither a) or b) applies in this case.
fuzzy2 7y ago
It’s in the quote. ^^ That’s correct, in case they actually ship the source code with the hardware, they’re complying. I very much doubt they do that. As such, option b) comes into play. The GPL FAQ is very clear on the point that "any third party" means exactly that: Anyone that gets a hold of the offer (which you’re required to provide, otherwise probably also a violation) can request the source code.

That language seems to exist only in GPL v1. It is also part of a list of 'or' options. You can abide by one of the other options and not need to adhere to this one.

teddyh 7y ago

No, that language is in both GPLv1 and GPLv2 (in GPLv3 it’s “anyone who possesses the object code”). Yes, it’s one of a list of alternatives. The GPLv1 and GPLv2 sole applicable alternative to the written offer is to send the source code together with the compiled code; i.e. to all customers, in the box. Which they presumably didn’t do, so I don’t know why you bring it up. (GPLv3 adds the allowable alternative to point to a web page or similar where the source code may be downloaded. I.e. you don’t have to waste money by shipping a CD, you can just print the URL on a note or in the manual. But this was the GPLv2, not v3, so it’s not applicable here, nor has anyone said that any such URL was provided.)

pricechild 7y ago
My mistake, you are right in that the same language appears in v2. My point is that the op commented: > No part of the GPL, as far as I'm aware, requires distribution to anyone who isn't a customer. ...and I am agreeing to this position, against fuzzyh. Specifically "anyone" != "any third party" != "any third party... unless you've abided by a) or b), which don't require distribution to 'anyone' either."
- teddyh 7y ago
  But it’s obvious that neither a) or b) applies in this case.

fuzzy2 7y ago

It’s in the quote. ^^ That’s correct, in case they actually ship the source code with the hardware, they’re complying. I very much doubt they do that. As such, option b) comes into play. The GPL FAQ is very clear on the point that "any third party" means exactly that: Anyone that gets a hold of the offer (which you’re required to provide, otherwise probably also a violation) can request the source code.