On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 05:39:59 -0400 Daniel Dickinson wrote: > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:00:58 +0200 > Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote: [...] > > The problem is: > > what happens if the VCS goes off-line for one afternoon > > (or for one night, for a couple of days, for a week, ..., forever)? > > > > Am I failing to comply with the AfferoGPLv3, unless I immediately shut > > the network application down (until the VCS is back on-line) or I > > immediately provide an alternative means to get the Corresponding > > Source? > > > > > Again, the GPL has the same 'problem'. How so? > If you can't give someone the source, you're in in violation. If I distribute object code according to GPLv2 clause 3a or to GPLv3 clause 6a, I am accompanying it with source code. Once I've done so, there's no chance I can't give someone the source code, since I've already complied with the license and have no further obligations. If I distribute object code by offering access to copy from some place, like, e.g., a network server, I have to offer access to copy the source code from the same place (the last part of GPLv2 Section 3 states that this is equivalent to complying to clause 3a; in the case of GPLv3, this is clause 6d, provided one chooses to offer access from the same place, e.g. same server). Once I've set things up this way, I am offering equivalent access to object code and to source code: source will be available as long as object is. Again, I have no obligations for the future. These are the DFSG-free ways to distribute object code and comply with the GNU GPL. Making or forwarding written offers is a non-free option, hence we should not take it into account. Please note that, in both the above-described cases, I am *already* distributing object code and thus bearing the (possible) costs or difficulties associated with distributing software. The GPL merely refrains from allowing the distribution of object code, unless I also make the source available (in one of the two outlined ways, or else with the non-free written offers, should I prefer that path...). In the case of the AfferoGPLv3, I am *not* already distributing software. I modified the application and simply want to run it on my server. In order to do so, I am compelled to offer to distribute source code to users. Let's see what I can do: * if the application runs on a resource-limited server (think about a small embedded system...), I cannot use the same host * if I don't want to publish the application (but only distribute it to my users), I cannot use a public hosting service * if I cannot afford the costs of ensuring it is available as long as the application runs, I cannot use another host owned or hired by me It seems the only option left is shutting the application down whenever the source-distributing server goes off-line, which is a significant restriction on the act of running a modified application. -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/index.html#nanodocs The nano-document series is here! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpLPcnYUzojY.pgp
Description: PGP signature