[License-discuss] Source code availability after end of life

[Thorbjørn Vynne]

Got it

Thanks Bruce.

On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 6:17 AM Bruce Perens <bruce.perens at opensource.org>
wrote:

> Is this really unclear? If you didn't distribute source code with the
> binary, you need to make sure that it's kept available for three years
> after the last time you distributed a binary copy, or the last time that
> any of your business relationships such as dealers and distributors did. I
> mention the dealers and distributors because the three-year obligation is
> theirs as well, but they generally have no idea how to fulfill it.
> Fulfilling the source code responsibility for them is better than having
> them (and you) get sued, and then having them sue you.
>
> Because this is license-discuss, and I'm not here to market my services, I
> will speak with your attorney _for_free_ if they need some clarity.
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Bruce
>
>  3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
> under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
> Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
>
>     a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
>     source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
>     1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
>     b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
>     years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
>     cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
>     machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
>     distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
>     customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
>     c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
>     to distribute corresponding source code.  (This alternative is
>     allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
>     received the program in object code or executable form with such
>     an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:02 AM, David Woolley <forums at david-woolley.me.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 02/08/18 08:09, Thorbjørn Vynne wrote:
>>
>> For an end-of-life commercial product that are using GPL based software,
>>> can any one clarify if its a requirement to keep having making the source
>>> available even though no more products are shipped or serviced.
>>>
>>
>> Please explain what is not clear in the wording of the GPL.  In any case,
>> if it is unclear, only your own lawyer can give you an opinion on which you
>> can safely rely.
>>
>> Also note that the GPL strongly hints that any commercial distributor
>> should supply the source at the time they supply the binary; otherwise they
>> enter into a commitment to supply the source to non-customers.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> License-discuss mailing list
>> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>>
>> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering
> Standards committee chair, license committee member, co-founder, Open
> Source Initiative
> President, Open Research Institute
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20180804/ad18e1c5/attachment.html>