[linux-audio-dev] GPL concerns

[Andreas Kuckartz]

RTFF (Read The Fine FAQ), please.

See:

Does the GPL allow me to distribute a modified or beta version under a
nondisclosure agreement?
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowNDA

Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure
agreement?
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DevelopChangesUnderNDA

Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU GPL
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

Licenses
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html

Cheers,
Andreas

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shane" <lists at itsagesolutions.com>
To: <linux-audio-dev at music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 7:31 AM
Subject: [linux-audio-dev] GPL concerns


> Hey everyone.  I have a bland but important question for everyone.  Say
> hypothetically a company is developing an audio product using lots of
> GPL source, but for whatever marketing reasons asks for NDA concerning
> the codebase.  Lots of GPL work is referenced and at least dynamically
> linked, and though the company has directly stated that it will release
> the codebase publicly with the product release (once it is complete).
>
> I am curious as to the general feel in the community on such practices.
> Would this 1) be a violation of the GPL, 2) if it is how tolerant would
> the OSS community be, considering the general good intent of the
> project,  and 3) if I were asked to sign such a NDA would that document
> be a binding agreement even if the NDA itself might be a violation of
> the GPL since it is inherently counterintuitive to the intent of the
> GPL.
>
> Anyway, I know some of you have already been there with the fun NDA
> stuff and thought you the best bunch of people to ask before getting
> myself stuck in a NDA I am not completely comfortable with.  The current
> project cycle (hypothetically) is two years.  I know this is happening
> in the industry quite frequently already, but I am not sure I completely
> agree or disagree with the practice (assuming the codebase does make it
> into the public domain).  On one hand I can sympathize with the
> difficulties involved in bringing new products to market and how leaks
> in early design phases can undercut profits enormously.  On the
> otherhand I would love to see more companies taking an open and
> community approach to product development such as open ICs, and even
> open business management.  I am sure this would happen a lot more if
> such efforts were a tax write off :), but then we live in the world we
> live in.
>
> Any thoughts, references to successful business models concerning
> hardware development with free software, and legal cautions are all
> greatly appreciated.
>
> Yours truly,
> Shane
>
> PS I apologize in advance for any redundancy on this subject :).
>
>