3 ms·
From the highlighted answer: > A Short Story To Illustrate: > Someone else decides the code is a good solution for a problem they are facing, and decides to c
by whereistimbo 6y ago
From the highlighted answer:
> A Short Story To Illustrate:
> Someone else decides the code is a good solution for a problem they are facing, and decides to copy it into their open source GnuFizzBuzz project, covered by the GPL.
Five years from now, someone is doing an open source audit on your code (maybe you are selling to a nervous customer, or your company is going public).
> The open source audit finds the snippet of code you got from Stack Overflow, and recognizes it as originating in GnuFizzBuzz.
> You are now stuck explaining how/why you have GPL code mixed into your commercial product, or proving that the code was actually from Stack Overflow. Can you prove that the person posting the code to Stack Overflow owned it to begin with (maybe they actually copied it from GnuFizzBuzz to begin wih).
- gruez 6y agoIsn't that easy to prove with timestamps?
- TeMPOraL 6y agoIf T(StackOverflow comment) < T(GPL use) < T(your use), you'll still get in trouble.
- gruez 6y agoWhy? Doesn't that prove the copyright belongs to the SO commenter (and therefore permissively licensed), not the GPL author?
- TeMPOraL 6y agoBut you now have to prove you actually got it from SO, not from the GPL project.
- gruez 6y agoIs that actually required, or it the legal team being overly cautious? AFAIK how GPL works is "here's my code. I own the copyright (by default), but I'll license it to you on the condition that you license it back to your users", but if you don't own the copyright to that snippet (as evidenced by someone posting it before you did), then you're not in a position to make demands. It'd be like demanding rent from tenants living in a building that you don't own.