Redefining GPL?

Thu Nov 30 17:33:32 UTC 2006

On Nov 29, 2006, at 10:53 PM, Ben Tilly wrote:
> Suppose I write a JavaScript library.  And I GPL it.  You use that in
> an application.  A user comes and browses your site, the JavaScript
> file is referenced and sent to that user.
>
> What are your obligations now?  I am not a lawyer, but it looks to me
> like my copyrighted content was distributed to that user.  Does that
> user now need to have a copyright notice, a copy of the license, etc
> all distributed in addition?

Certainly the minimum would be a copyright notice and a statement  
that the javascript code is licensed under the GPL.  For example, the  
first hit for "GPL JavaScript" brings back:

    http://shop-js.sourceforge.net/crypto2.htm

...which, if you view the start of the HTML source:

> <html>
> <head>
> <title>GPL JavaScript Public Key Encryption Demo</title>
> </head>
>
> <body>
> <script src="crypto.js"></script>
> <script language="JavaScript"><!--
> /* The following functions are (c) 2000 by John M Hanna and are
> * released under the terms of the Gnu Public License.
> * You must freely redistribute them with their source -- see the
> * GPL for details.
> *  -- Latest version found at http://sourceforge.net/projects/shop-js
> */

A check of other JavaScript or AJAX projects under the GPL suggests  
that many people include a link to the GPL, either via having the  
LICENSE file somewhere on their site, or linking to something like:

   http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html

-- 
-Chuck