Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
BiasBiasPosted Jun 7, 2011 15:56 UTC (Tue) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582)In reply to: Bias by KSteffensen Parent article: Android, forking, and control
No, the companies that distribute binaries of GPL software must do so under the GPL. Nothing else gives them the right to do so. The point is only the kernel of Honeycomb is GPL and Google has released the source for that. The rest is under the Apache license or is Google-owned.
(Log in to post comments)
Bias Posted Jun 10, 2011 23:11 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] FOSS is not about all source code being available to everyone at no cost, FOSS is about the right to modify stuff you have bought and paid for.No, the companies that distribute binaries of GPL software must do so under the GPL. KSteffensen's point is that a company doesn't have to distribute binaries of GPL software (and consequently doesn't have to distribute source code). KSteffensen makes a very astute observation: getting people to distribute source code is a means, not an end, in the FOSS philosophy.
|
|||||||||||||