Timeline for How does the GNU General Public License (GPL) conform to the Open Source Initiative's (OSI) Open Source Definition (OSD)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot | Commonmark migration | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 10:06 | vote | accept | Encaitar | ||
| Sep 10, 2014 at 10:06 | vote | accept | Encaitar | ||
| Sep 10, 2014 at 10:06 | |||||
| Sep 9, 2014 at 12:20 | answer | added | Philipp | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 9, 2014 at 9:36 | history | edited | ratchet freak | CC BY-SA 3.0 | numbered list formatting can now start at any number |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 11:18 | comment | added | Encaitar | @amon. I think your comments almost comprise an answer. The last point was just the 'package with' distinction. From my understanding now, static or dynamic linking to non GPL'd code is not allowed in GPL but is allowed in LGPL. Although I conceed that that is probably a separate question, and judging by the different answers on programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/167773/… it is one of those, you have to go to court to find out what the law is kind of questions. | |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:59 | comment | added | amon | @Encaitar yes, you either have to distribute the source directly or make it easily accessible. The central point of the GPL is that any user can see how your program works, and that he can make and distribute derived works of their own – free software as in freedom of speech. That free software happens to often be free of charge is a side effect of this: If you sell me your GPL-licensed software for 100€, I am free to resell copies for 50€. So you wouldn't sell the software itself (anyone can undercut your price), but services around that software (setup, support, bugfixes, warranties, …) | |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:58 | history | edited | yannis | CC BY-SA 3.0 | list formatting can be a PITA |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:38 | comment | added | Encaitar | @amon I think you may have found the issue with my understanding. Is it true that the GPL does not stop you from requesting people pay for the derived work if they also request the source code you have to provide it? | |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:30 | comment | added | Thomas Owens♦ | What in the GPL restricts the sale of software? | |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:20 | comment | added | amon | “GPL specifically restricts you from selling the software” – it does not. IIRC, it doesn't even require you to share the source code free of charge. It does however require you to to make the modified source accessible if you distribute modified versions (e.g. selling binaries of a modified version). It just happens to make no economic sense to sell open source software, as a bought copy can be redistributed itself without further restrictions; open-source companies sell related services instead. | |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:17 | history | edited | Encaitar | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 826 characters in body |
| Mar 12, 2014 at 10:02 | history | asked | Encaitar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |