Do download sites violate GNU GPL programs?

[Ben Tilly]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:51 AM, Lior W. <opensource.*.nwo at neverbox.com> wrote:
> VirtualDub is an example of a popular GNU GPL program for which only
> binaries are hosted by download sites (except the official site).
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#SourceAndBinaryOnDifferentSites
> (in case it's also relevant for the older GPLv2) states it's only valid
> to not also host the source code) if they "provide clear instructions
> people can follow to obtain the source." Well, they don't.
>
> Moreover, I would bet they also don't "take care to make sure that the
> source remains available for as long as you distribute the object code."
> If the official site were to dissapear, does anyone here really think
> they'll stop hosting VirtualDub? After all, download sites are known for
> keeping files that have lost their official sites years (if not a decade)
> ago. They usually don't even have a unique category for GNU GPL
> softwares, which could have put them under special supervision.

>From your description, they are violating the license.  The correct
thing to do about it is to contact the authors of VirtualDub, and let
them know.  If they are bothered by it, the proper thing for those
authors to do would be to politely contact the download sites, explain
the GPL, and ask them to start following the GPL.  Which should be
fairly easy for the download sites.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.  However this fits
with the advice given in
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReportingViolation and how
the FSF enforces the GPL as described in
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html.