3 ms·
My understanding is it requires active publishing, but I'm not a lawyer. Here's what I believe to be the relevant section > 13. Remote Network Interaction; Use
by gpm 3y ago
My understanding is it requires active publishing, but I'm not a lawyer. Here's what I believe to be the relevant section
> 13. Remote Network Interaction; Use with the GNU General Public License.
> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph.
I'm particularly looking at "from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software", I don't believe "upon emailed request" qualifies.
- sgtnoodle 3y agoIs email not customary? It seems like it would be fine as long as they respond in a timely manner, and provide access instructions. Also, in this situation it seems like that's exactly what happened. I suppose what might be non-compliant is if their website doesn't explicitly document the process to access the source, i.e. "send an email to this addressm to request the most up-to-date source code."
- gpm 3y agoEmail is customary for some things of course, however I don't believe it is a "customary means of facilitating copying of software". Nor do I believe it is "providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server". It needs to be both to satisfy the license.