Subject: Re: Best licence for my software?
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 06:53:32 +0100



--On 17 April 2005 14:48 -0400 Matthew Seth Flaschen <superm40@comcast.net> 
wrote:

>> Note the GPL does *NOT* prevent incorporation of your code into a
>> propietary program. If your code is *DISTRIBUTED* by a third party
>> as part of an application, then that third party must provide source
>> to the whole thing under the GPL at (essentially) no cost, to those
>> to whom the application was distributed.
>>
> Yes, it DOES.

Which clause in the GPL says you cannot license code you own the
copyright to under any other version?

> "Proprietary software is software that is not free or semi-free"
> Therefore, because GPL-ed software is free software according to the FSF,
> and the third-party must provide source under the GPL, they can not
> created proprietary software from the code.  Proprietary does not
> equal(!=) Commercial (see
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/selling.html at the FSF)

I'm reading the text of the license, not the FSF's interpretation thereof.

As far as I can tell, I can incorporate someone else's GPL into my own
proprietary source sitting on my machine to my heart's content. The problem
comes if I *DISTRIBUTE* it, and don't make the the combined work available
under the GPL, as well as under my own license. If I don't distribute, what
clause in the GPL am I breaking?

The FSF explanations are (understandably) trying to simplify things.
They neither cover all corner cases, nor do they fully cover dual
licensing.

Alex