4 ms·
The authors can re-license right, even for one (paying) customer? They could also pay for the promise not to sue? IANAL.
by throwaway934876 5y ago
The authors can re-license right, even for one (paying) customer? They could also pay for the promise not to sue? IANAL.
- daptaq 5y agoI remember reading that it should be able for users to sue instead of the author, if they cannot ccess the source of GPL'ed software.
- pabs3 5y agoThe Software Freedom Conservancy are trying to set that precedent right now in their lawsuit against Vizio for GPL violations in their televisions: https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html
- daptaq 5y agoYes, that was what I had in mind. Thank you!
- vlovich123 5y agoI’m fact it’s only the users who have standing to request the source. The author’s have standing to sue for copyright infringement.
- colejohnson66 5y agoNot at all true. It's copyright infringement if you're not following a license contract, of which the GPL is.
- vlovich123 5y agoThe GPL contract only says you have to distribute source to the users you give binaries to. The only people who can ask for said source are the people receiving those binaries and the only people who have standing to sue when that doesn’t happen is the copyright owners. That’s why you can use GPL software in your private CI system and not need to give anyone the source code.
- pabs3 5y agoHopefully the SFC lawsuit against Vizio will set the precedent that any recipient of GPL binaries has standing to sue: https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html
- colejohnson66 5y agoI see I misread your comment. My apologies.
- vlovich123 5y agoOnly if the project owns the copyright or otherwise has been granted such powers in their contribution agreement. Otherwise, no. They’d have to get approval from every autho/rewrite the code they don’t have a license for to provide a copy that isn’t GPL.