4 ms·

I thought Orange Business Services sold it to the French gov, did they not?

by mzs 5y ago

zozbot234 5y ago
Did they sell the software to the French gov, or deploy a managed service that only used this software under the hood (thus avoiding even the "public performance" part of copyright, that might otherwise apply to a SaaS deployment)? The distinction is quite critical to this case, if they did the latter it's no different than Amazon doing the same thing.
Mikeb85 5y ago
Using it for a service still isn't 'redistribution' as per the GPL. It still wouldn't be considered to have left the organization. It's perfectly fine use as per the GPL. And if it's the French government who contracted the whole thing, they're the original owner, not Orange, but either way it's fine (an owner giving access to a contractor to work on a program containing GPL code isn't considered redistribution either, nor is a contractor using open-source code in a project for a client). Edit - also even if Orange used it internally, then made the French government a service which uses it, as long as Orange simply re-sourced the code for the government it's fine. It's like Amazon selling hosted Linux images.
- user5994461 5y ago
  think: Orange makes software for the government, that the government pays for, that actually turns out to be existing software owned by someone else and under GPL license (which extends to the whole project and has other implications). That's very much the definition of counterfeiting.
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    There's also workarounds and it isn't necessarily 'counterfeiting'. Think Amazon selling hosted Linux OS images. Think commercial software that needs GPL software to run so the user downloads the GPL software themselves instead of it being bundled.
toast0 5y ago
Did the French government ask for source code or seek to do anything else the GPL allows only to have Orange refuse or block the move? That doesn't seem to be asserted in the article.

I thought Orange Business Services sold it to the French gov, did they not?

by mzs 5y ago

I thought Orange Business Services sold it to the French gov, did they not?

Did they sell the software to the French gov, or deploy a managed service that only used this software under the hood (thus avoiding even the "public performance" part of copyright, that might otherwise apply to a SaaS deployment)? The distinction is quite critical to this case, if they did the latter it's no different than Amazon doing the same thing.

Mikeb85 5y ago

Using it for a service still isn't 'redistribution' as per the GPL. It still wouldn't be considered to have left the organization. It's perfectly fine use as per the GPL. And if it's the French government who contracted the whole thing, they're the original owner, not Orange, but either way it's fine (an owner giving access to a contractor to work on a program containing GPL code isn't considered redistribution either, nor is a contractor using open-source code in a project for a client). Edit - also even if Orange used it internally, then made the French government a service which uses it, as long as Orange simply re-sourced the code for the government it's fine. It's like Amazon selling hosted Linux images.

user5994461 5y ago
think: Orange makes software for the government, that the government pays for, that actually turns out to be existing software owned by someone else and under GPL license (which extends to the whole project and has other implications). That's very much the definition of counterfeiting.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  There's also workarounds and it isn't necessarily 'counterfeiting'. Think Amazon selling hosted Linux OS images. Think commercial software that needs GPL software to run so the user downloads the GPL software themselves instead of it being bundled.

toast0 5y ago

Did the French government ask for source code or seek to do anything else the GPL allows only to have Orange refuse or block the move? That doesn't seem to be asserted in the article.