Corel: No "internal" exemption in GPL

[Justin Wells]

If my company buys a book, we are not allowed to make 1000 copies of it
and hand them out free to all employees and shareholders. We have no right
to make copies of the book for this kind of "internal development".

Why would it be OK to do this with copyrighted software? 

Ordinary copyright law does not permit it, and the GPL certainly contains 
no exception for "internal use" or "internal development". It (or is it 
the LGPL?) even goes so far as to say that if you link against GPL material
in memory, the copy in memory is subject to the GPL even though
the material you linked with is not.

I trust that Corel IS going to resolve this problem in a fair and friendly
way, it seems to me to be an honest mistake--everyone makes mistakes, and
I don't hold any grudge over this. 

I am worried that people seem to be getting the idea that if you 
use something for "internal development" you are somehow exempt from 
the conditions of the GPL, so long as you keep it inside your company.

Justin


On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 01:09:56AM -0000, bruce at perens.com wrote:
> I got a very reassuring phone call from Corel today, I'm confident
> the problem will be resolved.
> 
> Regarding your GPL question, I think you could make a case that distribution
> to your own employee or a contractor is part of internal development, but the
> beta test agreement doesn't really establish a contractor relationship.
> 
> Anyway, this is not going to be tested this time.
> 
> 	Thanks
> 
> 	Bruce