3 ms·
Anyone can make open source code changes and be license compliant as long as you don't release the binary (YMMV depending on specific license). However as soon
by Rebelgecko 4y ago
Anyone can make open source code changes and be license compliant as long as you don't release the binary (YMMV depending on specific license). However as soon as you give someone binaries they're entitled to request the source. I'd love to see a future with goofy situations like Iran suing for the stuxnet source code because it statically linked a GPL library.
- xxpor 4y agowhere it gets really goofy is the US gov work doesn't have copyright itself, so wouldn't any work done by them be PD, regardless of the underlying license?
- not2b 4y agoIf they extend an existing GPL work, the work as a whole is GPL, even if their added code is PD.
- kmeisthax 4y agoMy gut feeling is no, because the work is still a derivative work of a privately-owned copyrighted work, and private copyright does not dissolve when the government touches it. If you could separate the governments' code from the GPL code, then it would be automatically public domain, but the combination is still GPL. However I'm not aware of any case law proving this.
- SllX 4y agoMy first instinct is that sovereign immunity applies. GPL is a license designed to protect the copyrights of the creator or copyright owner, but copyright itself is a privilege granted by the Federal government and protected by law. So if you sued them for violating the GPL, I’m fairly certain they could just claim sovereign immunity in court.
- pabs3 4y agoThere is a comment about that up-thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32957861 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32957861