Basic GPL Question (Newbie Warning)

Ruth A. Kramer rhkramer at fast.net
Wed Dec 8 22:38:10 UTC 2004


Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> Kelly Anderson wrote:
> > SpamAssassin is licensed under the GPL. It is obvious that it has been and
> > is permitted to incorporate SA into commercial products because there is a
> > commercial product page on the official SA home page. By one reading of the
> > GPL, if one uses GPL software to create a derivative work, the derivative
> > work must also be released under the GPL.
> 
> There's no obligation to release the derivative work under GPL. You
> are free to keep the derivative work a secret, as long as you use it
> only internally in your organization. But if you want to distribute
> the derivative work, then you have to do it under GPL and not any
> other license.
> 
> So if I'm an ISP, I can modify SA to work with my mailserver and I
> do not have to share my modifications with anyone. If I sell a
> mailserver product, I have to give my customers the modified SA
> with source code under GPL.

I haven't looked at the SpamAssassing page / license before making this
comment, but there is another way (iiuc) that commerical / proprietary
version of SpamAssassin could be offered without violating the GPL and
not requiring that modifications be shared etc.  The original author(s)
/ copyright holders of the SpamAssassin code could dual license it,
making a (presumably free or low cost copy) available under the terms of
the GPL, and selling (presumably at higher cost) a copy under a
different license.  

There could be "real" differences in the programming of the two copies
(versions) or they could be identical except for the license.

IANAL.

Randy Kramer



More information about the License-discuss mailing list