[kwlug-disc] Wordpress themes must be GPL
R. Brent Clements
rbclemen at gmail.com
Thu Jul 29 13:28:17 EDT 2010
Should have looked up that quote you used before I sent that.....
The part you quoted is in the section on the right to convey
non-source forms. It is one of the obligations of the party providing
And if I put the code on an FTP site they may include that link as
their obligation to providing source code. But I am not obligated to
do it that way if I include it in my distribution package.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:22 PM, R. Brent Clements <rbclemen at gmail.com> wrote:
> If I distribute the source with the object code to a second party, I
> have met my obligations. If they then distribute it to a third party
> without the source code, then they are not complying with the license,
> not me. The second party needs to either include the source (which
> they received) or provide it at their own expense. The second party
> cannot contractually obligate the first party to the third party.
> That would never hold up in law. The part about not needing to accept
> the license in order to propagate it would imply that the source is
> still included.
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Khalid Baheyeldin <kb at 2bits.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:50 PM, R. Brent Clements <rbclemen at gmail.com>
>>> I just re-read the GPL v3 quickly, and I see nothing about being
>>> obligated to anyone other than the entities I directly conveyed the
>>> work to. I understand that in a feel-good, share-and-share-alike
>>> world that is all very feel good and all, but it is the line that
>>> divides. If RMS was required to give away copies in order to have the
>>> right to sell them that would be completely different. In my example
>>> above the nominal cost of receiving a copy of my source from me is
>>> $100, and I will throw in a free copy of the binaries and related
>>> >From the licence:
>>> --begin cut
>>> 6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.
>>> You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of
>>> sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable
>>> Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these
>>> a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
>>> (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
>>> Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium customarily
>>> used for software interchange.
>>> b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
>>> (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written
>>> offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you
>>> offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give
>>> anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the
>>> Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is
>>> covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used
>>> for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable
>>> cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access
>>> to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
>>> --end cut
>>> Key part there is obligated to give the source to those who possess
>>> the object code
>>> And from what I can tell including the source only with the original
>>> distribution is perfectly legit under the GPL
>>> Obviously my 10 customers could decide to redistribute the contents of
>>> the medium in any way they see fit, but if they don't copy the whole
>>> package including the source to their "customers" they are modifying
>>> the work and would have to cover the cost of distributing the source
>> Look at this:
>> "... to give ANYONE WHO POSSESSES THE OBJECT CODE either (1) a copy
>> of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is
>> covered by
>> this License, ... , or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a
>> network server at no charge."
>> First, if you are distributing PHP or Ruby or Python, then it is already
>> source code.
>> But regardless, if you sell the binary form to anyone, the license allows
>> that person
>> to give the binary to anyone they want to share with. Then that third person
>> can ask
>> you for the source code and you are obliged to give it to them.
>> So, third parties can ask for the source code, and you have to make it
>> If you are using the GPL code internally only for tools and such, then this
>> is not
>> distributing, and you are not obliged to give anyone access to it. The
>> trigger is
>> "distribution", including selling, sharing, ...etc.
>> Khalid M. Baheyeldin
>> 2bits.com, Inc.
>> Drupal optimization, development, customization and consulting.
>> Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. -- Edsger W.Dijkstra
>> Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. -- Leonardo da Vinci
>> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
>> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
More information about the kwlug-disc_kwlug.org