4 ms·
Its not a loop hole, the GPL only ever required you to give the source to users, it never required the source to be public.
by jacooper 3y ago
Its not a loop hole, the GPL only ever required you to give the source to users, it never required the source to be public.
- mindslight 3y agoSure, but the terms of the GPL imply other not-explicitly-specified results due to straightforward emergent behavior. Like the terms themselves don't prohibit (and even encourage) charging for GPL software, but in the presence of FSF's Freedom #2 (redistribution), the price ends up tied to the work of distribution rather than the utility of the software. That overall resulting state of affairs is what people are taking for granted and reacting against possibly changing.