OSI enforcement?

Philippe Verdy verdy_p at wanadoo.fr
Thu Jan 10 23:45:52 UTC 2008

> De : David Woolley [mailto:forums at david-woolley.me.uk]
> Envoyé : vendredi 11 janvier 2008 00:20
> Cc : license-discuss at opensource.org
> Objet : Re: OSI enforcement?
> Philippe Verdy wrote:
> > Users of any GPL'ed softwares are not limited to ask for the sources
> only to
> > their direct distributors, they can request them to any party that was
> Not any party, but only parties who distributed the binary as part of a
> business, (or who modified the version they are distributing) and
> included a written offer to provide the sources and which the requestor
> should have received.  The licence only requires that written offer if
> the sources were not supplied at the same time as the binary.  Obviously
> look at the actual text for the exact conditions.
> The licence permits a charge for the direct costs of providing the source.
> I don't see any way that you can go past the last modifier, using this
> right.



This last one is interesting:
	If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand
he give me a copy? 
	No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of
the program if he chooses to do so. He also has the right not to
redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses.

In other words, it is enough that you are ANY distributor of the covered
program, given that all users of the covered software are treated equally
with non discriminatory rights or obligation. The obligation does not apply
however is you are just a user but not a distributor.

This is confirmed in:
	What does this “written offer valid for any third party” mean? Does
that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no
matter what?
	If you choose to provide source through a written offer, then
anybody who requests the source from you is entitled to receive it.
	If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source
code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source
code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they
received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This
means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still
receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer.
	The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party is
so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can order the
source code from you. 

And in:
	The GPL says that modified versions, if released, must be "licensed
... to all third parties." Who are these third parties?
	Section 2 says that modified versions you distribute must be
licensed to all third parties under the GPL. "All third parties" means
absolutely everyone—but this does not require you to *do* anything
physically for them. 	It only means they have a license from you, under
the GPL, for your version.

The only condition is that they must have a valid licence directly from you
for the software, which also means that they have accepted its terms, and
which permits unlimited redistribution to anyone that will also get a valid
licence directly from you (no sublicencing permitted in GPL).

In other words, you are not allowed to discriminate between all valid

More information about the License-discuss mailing list