Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • 1
    Well, part of the key here is that the GPL family is a distribution license, not a use license like an EULA is. If your customer intended to redistribute the software to third parties, they'd be on the hook for GPL license compliance. If they simply contracted you to produce software, then there's no problem. This is how large corporations like Google "get away" with heavily modifying Open Source code to run their servers internally: they aren't distributing it, so it doesn't have to be made available. Commented Oct 28, 2014 at 19:45
  • @BaconBits - Note that the original question also talks about AGPL, which was specifically designed to prevent a service based on the code being used without release of the source code. Commented Oct 30, 2014 at 10:59
  • @MarkBooth That's true. I should have been more clear. Commented Oct 30, 2014 at 13:03