5 Aug
2009
5 Aug
'09
10:58 p.m.
On Tuesday 28 July 2009 22:12:44 Simon Jenkins wrote:
He
SHOULD have licensed his modifications under the GPL but he DIDN'T
(remember?) which means you don't have a license for the modifications.
Where do you see this breaking down?
Let's take a few made up examples:
I write a program from scratch. I compile it and release the binary only but
claim the program is under the GPL.
Is it? Can anyone force me to give them the source? Can anyone "de-compile"
the binary and release that source under the GPL?
Say instead, I start with a the GPL source to a program you wrote, I modify it
and release the binary under the GPL. When asked for the source I refuse and
possibly claim the dog ate it. Is my modified program under the GPL? Does my
making the claim about the dog matter at all? Since I claim the binary is
GPL, can you legally "de-compile" my released binary and put appropriate GPL
notices on the resulting source?
Are there any other cases that need to be considered?
all the best,
drew