[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Upstream violates GNU GPL?



In message <200812151301.59080.wjl@icecavern.net>, Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> writes
On Monday 15 December 2008 11:48:58 Sergei Golovan wrote:
So the questions are: Are my suspicions correct, and ejabberd upstream
indeed violates GNU GPL, or am I wrong? If they are then which is the
best action to do (Should we continue to distribute ejabberd and
therefore promote it? Should I contact FSF with this question?)?

Just a comment: if the upstream authors actually own all the copyrights
(e.g. there are no 3rd-party contributors), they can legally release any
sort of binaries, etc, even if no one else can. However, even if this is
the case, releasing artifacts without source in this manner is bad form.

The trouble with this is, although upstream can release what they like under the GPL how they like (provided they own the copyright), if downstream can't include the source then the GPL is of no use.

Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - anthony@thewolery.demon.co.uk


Reply to: