[sldev] GPL violation?

[Dante Tucker]

Just to be clear. I was taking into account the fact that the seller is
refusing to give out the source in my assessment of "what is allowed".

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Cenji Neutra <cenji.neutra at gmail.com>
wrote:

> > From: "Dante Tucker" <danteferret at gmail.com>
> > To: "Johnnie Carling" <johnniecarling at gmail.com>
> > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 05:00:13 -0400
> > Subject: Re: [sldev] GPL violation?
> > I don't even remotly understand the viewers license terms. But I would
> think it is clear this is not allowed.
>
> Not sure which aspect you're referring to when you say "clear this is
> not allowed" Dante, but I know that the
> GPL certainly allows the sale of derivative works (binary and/or
> source).  That's part of the 'freedom' granted in
> all Free Software licenses.  However, if you purchase a copy then
> you're entitled to the source of their
> modifications (according to the GPL license).  So, if you do purchase
> a copy, ask them for the source of
> their changes and they won't give them to you - then they are in
> violation of the GPL license terms.
> You're also within your right to resell or give away that viewer too
> (source included of course).
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20080601/3e9a7c66/attachment.htm