url parsing

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

(e-mail address removed) (Jim Ley) writes:

Ok, I'll just answer this thread once, and start out saying that it's
off topic (highly interesting, though, but probably not to everyone
who is here for Javascript).

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 02:36:14 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn


What? So you're saying I can sell copies of GPL software as long as I
don't sell the licence, just the software itself. (which I can't of
course sell as I don't own the parts I didn't write, I only have a
licence to use it...) I think you should consult a lawyer...

I don't know what selling the license would entail, but yes, you can
sell copies of GPL'ed software. You don't need permission, the right
to distribute, even for money, is part of the GPL. The GPL is *not*
a license to *use* the software. It is a license to use the source,
make derivative programs, and distribute these as you see fit. The
catch is that you must also release the source of your derivative
under the GPL.

That is, you cannot distribute (for money or not) a program and refuse
to reveal the source. For an interpreted language, that is not really
a restriction, since all programs are distributed as source (unless
you obfuscate the source, then you must reveal unobfuscated source).

Could you explain how I can achieve it then?

Effectively, no. You are free to take money from the software.
You can't prevent other people from spreading it for free.

So, it's not hard to sell a whole work. What is hard is to make
money from it, unless you have a secondary means of income
(typically, that would be selling support for the product,
like, e.g., RedHat).

....

What are you talking about?

Did you follow the link? I think that page makes it quite clear.

Whether you care about whether the program is free software or
just open source, that is another matter.

the BSD licence is far less restrictive than the GPL,

Yes. That is why the (modified) BSD license is not a copyleft license.
It doesn't enforce that derivative works are also free.

if you also read further than the page you cited, you'll see that
the BSD is fully compatible with the GPL...

Yes. That means that you can include a module released under the BSD
license in a program covered by the GPL. The resulting program is
covered by the GPL license, and the included part also by the BSD
license.

Some licenses are not compatible with the GPL. Including a module
licensed under one of these in a GPL program would be in violation
of either that license or the GPL.

Being compatible does not mean that the lincense is a copyleft
license.

/L

 

[Fabian]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn hu kiteb:

I cannot accept that since it is of course wrong.
Read http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

As I understand the gpl license, it would be possible for me to sell it
one time, and possibly more if the initial purchaser does not
immediately start distributing it for no money, as would be his right
under that license. As I understand it.

 

[Jim Ley]

I don't know what selling the license would entail, but yes, you can
sell copies of GPL'ed software. You don't need permission, the right
to distribute, even for money, is part of the GPL.

Yes, the right to distribute for money, not the right to sell for
money (the distinction is in what the purchaser can do with the
product, and what they own.) Most of my work is done on a "work for
hire" basis where what I produce is owned and copyright by the person
who pays for my time (either because I'm an employee, or because the
contract states this) if I use a GPL part, then whilst they may own
it, there's very little protection for their IP as they have to
distribute full source and can only charge distribution costs. (which
since it's client side JS someone can just download it from the side
for free.)

The
catch is that you must also release the source of your derivative
under the GPL.

Which is one hell of a catch!

As you can only sell it once before you have competitors (since the
person you sell it to can then also sell it since they have a licence
which places no restriction that they don't)

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

So sure I can sell it once, but I can't sell it twice, as the 2nd
customer can just go either download it from the firsts site, or they
could even buy it from them at a lot less than I can do so.

Did you follow the link? I think that page makes it quite clear.

The page is clear, but I was trying to understand the context.

Yes. That means that you can include a module released under the BSD
license in a program covered by the GPL. The resulting program is
covered by the GPL license, and the included part also by the BSD
license.
Yes...

Being compatible does not mean that the lincense is a copyleft
license.

Who said it was?

Jim.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn hu kiteb:

As I understand the gpl license, it would be possible for me to sell it
one time, and possibly more if the initial purchaser does not
immediately start distributing it for no money, as would be his right
under that license. As I understand it.

You misunderstood it, read Lasse's good clarification.
The GPL is not about money, it is about the freedom to
use the source code.


F'up2 poster

PointedEars

 

[Fabian]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn hu kiteb:

You misunderstood it, read Lasse's good clarification.
The GPL is not about money, it is about the freedom to
use the source code.

And wouldn't that include the freedom to compile said source code and
sell teh compiled form? That is, after all, using the source code.

 

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

And wouldn't that include the freedom to compile said source code and
sell teh compiled form? That is, after all, using the source code.

Yes, you can do that under the GPL. "All" you are required to do is:
1) include the GPL, and
2) provide the source code to the binary program on demand.

It is not compatible with the traditional business model of software
producers (just selling the software).

/L

 

[Jim Ley]

Yes, you can do that under the GPL. "All" you are required to do is:
1) include the GPL, and
2) provide the source code to the binary program on demand.

And forbid any derivative works and future modifications to also be
under the GPL.

It is not compatible with the traditional business model of software
producers (just selling the software).

Neither is compatible with most work carried out as a contractor or a
supplier of completed works, where the contract almost universally
requires that the end result be owned by the purchaser, Seen as most
commercial work in javascript is done on this basis, there is
virtually no chance I would get any work if I used GPL'd components.
I cannot sell it, selling script is more than a licence to use/modify
etc.

I'd love to see the contracts some of you are signing that allow for
GPL code to be provided!

Jim.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

And forbid any derivative works and future modifications to also be
under the GPL.

No, you cannot do that since it would restrict the freedom of people
using the source code and is thus explicitely forbidden by the GPL itself:

| 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
| Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
| original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program
| subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any
| further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights
| granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance
| by third parties to this License.


PointedEars

 

[Jim Ley]

No, you cannot do that since it would restrict the freedom of people
using the source code and is thus explicitely forbidden by the GPL itself:

Exactly, so I cannot SELL the product, all I can do is sell the use of
the product under the restrictions the GPL gives, that's different
from selling it.

Jim.