Re: GPL and software I have written
Eric, and Brooks
I don't have Brooks' original post, so I'm replying to you and to
the list in hopes he will see it.
On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Eric G . Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 09:17:13AM -0600, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
> > Greetings!
> > I have a dilemma, and I expect this to end in a flame war, but here goes...
> > I am a computer science student, and I also work as a system administrator.
> > For one of my classes, I have written an e-commerce package. It is written
> > in C using GCC, it uses Mini-SQL, and runs on Apache as a CGI program. My
> > employer has expressed interest it this particular piece of software (my
> > e-commerce package).
> > I have issues with my employer that cause me to not want to merely hand
> > over my work.
Brooks:
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is NOT legal advice. See a
lawyer before acting on this suggestion.
The title to the software may be in question. The issue is what your
contract with your employer says, and whether you used any of his
resources (computer, network access etc) to develop the software.
If your contract says so, he owns what ever you did at work. If you
used his resources, he may have an interest.
> > Since I am not modifying any existing software, I am creating new software,
> > I can charge for the new software. This could be a license fee or
> > something.
Since your work isn't an extension of another work covered by the
GPL, the GPL shouldn't apply, necessarily, but your employer may
still have an interest in it.
See a lawyer for real legal advice, which this isn't.
Eric writes:
> You can't GPL it and charge for the *GPL* version. However, as you're
> the sole author, you could LICENSE the code for a fee and release old
> versions under GPL for free (which others could do whatever they want
> with except sell or re-license). Always put your Copyright on every code
> file.
I think you are in error about being unable to charge for code
distributed under the GPL. Reread the GPL. I believe that, in fact,
you can charge whatever the market will bear for code distributed
under the GPL.
Commercial Linux distributors such as Red Hat, Corell, Storm, and
Caldera do it all the time.
However, if you sell a program subject to the GPL, you must also
supply source at a cost no greater than your cost of duplication.
Further, you cannot prevent your customer from making derived works.
You cannot restrict further redistribution of binaries and source.
The recipient must also obey the GPL requirements in any
redistribution.
> > snip
I again disclaim any intention to give legal advice. This isn't
legal advice, and I don't practice law. It is my humble
interpretation of the GPL.
Your mileage may vary. Don't drive or operate heavy machinery after
using. This is not intended to diagnose, treat or cure any disease.
--David
David Teague, dbt@cs.wcu.edu
Debian GNU/Linux Because software support is free, timely,
useful, technically accurate, and friendly.
Reply to: