Timeline for Is it legal to delete an MIT-licensed github repository which was contributed to and then distribute this code as commercial?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23 at 16:51 | comment | added | Yakk - Adam Nevraumont | GPL requires that if you distribute binaries you also distribute source; you can fullfill this by providing link to a public repo of the source that is valid for a period of time. If they have distributed executables of a GPL and used the link provisions, then yes they are responsible to ensure the repo stays up (for a period of time). | |
| Jan 22 at 13:02 | comment | added | ecm | Agree with the main point here, however "are phrased in terms of how you cannot be denied a copy of the source code if you request one." is a little misleading. Copyleft can only apply if you're a recipient or (in case of AGPL, networked) user of an application. If you did not receive or communicate with an application then you do not have the right to receive sources upon request. This right is dependent on the copyleft clauses being applicable. | |
| S Jan 22 at 11:00 | review | First answers | |||
| Jan 22 at 14:52 | |||||
| S Jan 22 at 11:00 | history | answered | Chris Pressey | CC BY-SA 4.0 |