| |||||||||||||
OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPLOSBC: Life at the edge of the GPLPosted Apr 3, 2009 21:40 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPL by jordanb Parent article: OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPL
Only if the client says, "We can't open source this," does Norman recommend what he calls "shimming,"consultant: You shouldn't try to end-run the GPL. client: We've already decided that that's what we want to do, which is why we hired you. consultant: Ok here's how you get away with it. That's not how I interpret "We can't open source this." I think it's more like this: consultant: the easiest thing to do is open source your product. client: We can't -- it includes code copyrighted by other people and they won't let us. consultant: Ok, if you want to publish your product at all, this is what you'll have to do: Another form of "we can't open source this" would be, "the nature of this product is just that if we open source it we will not be able to recoup our development costs. It's either closed source or no product."
(Log in to post comments)
OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPL Posted Apr 3, 2009 23:28 UTC (Fri) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]
Then the proper response would be to not use the GPLed component, rather than hiring a consultant to help them weasel around the license.
OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPL Posted Apr 4, 2009 0:42 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Then the proper response would be to not use the GPLed component, rather than hiring a consultant to help them weasel around the license. Weasel around the copyright. The license does nothing but add to their ability to distribute the code. It's the copyright that stands in their way.
|
|||||||||||||