Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

On the GPL and Releasing Source Code

Posted by Cliff on from the satisfying-the-GPL-on-turnkey-platforms dept.

wally@smug asks: "I work for a company that is developing a computer-based hardware product. For the O/S, we are (of course) using Linux. The GPL issue is this: the hardware and software are set up for a specific set of tasks, and users fiddling with the software setup would be a bad thing (and a potentially huge source of returns of "faulty" products). So users will not have an account or root password given to them (as it's not required to use the product). However, it's still Linux, and it's still under the GPL. So, we are distributing the Linux binaries, and so there has to be access to the source and we'd like to avoid having to distribute a Source Code CD with every system." Are there other options that might work? Would a visible web page with links to the source code be sufficient?

wally@smug continues: "We'd like to avoid having to ship a CD-ROM of source code with each product, so using a web site is the best solution for us. Obviously, for GPL programs that we have modified, we are going to have to release the source code on our website. That is pretty much clear.

The tricky part comes to the distribution of the source for everything else on the unit.

If we used (for example) Red Hat Linux, it is my understanding that we can not just link to the source on the Red Hat website, as Red Hat is a "commercial" distribution. Is this correct? (What exactly constitutes "commercial" under the GPL anyway?)

Or is section 3. (c) of the GPL talking about us being commercial, and not the original distribution? Of so, is our distribution "commercial" or not? (We are really selling the hardware unit and our own custom software that drives it, and not the distribution...)

How about if we just obtained each program/item from their original source on the web, and not from a distribution? Can we then just use hyperlinks to the source?

Ideas and comments would be greatly appreciated. "

I figure there will be a lot of future Linux-based solutions that will follow a similar model and, rather than being a computer that you control, will be more of a turnkey product that you buy and use (while the vendor is responsible for things like maintenance and administration). So for setups like this, source distribution becomes a bit of a problem (and a considerable nuisance to the vendor). What are ways such vendors can distribute such products yet still remain compliant to the GPL?

2 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. Just read the GPL... by Cee · · Score: 5

    3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
    under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
    Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

    b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
    years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
    cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
    machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
    distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
    customarily used for software interchange; or,

    So you can use section 3b instead of 3c if you for instance have an ftp or web site up at least three years from the release date containing the source code.

  2. no need to distribute source with every system by elflord · · Score: 5
    We'd like to avoid having to ship a CD-ROM of source code with each product,

    The GPL doesn't require you to do so. As long as the source is available.

    Obviously, for GPL programs that we have modified, we are going to have to release the source code on our website. That is pretty much clear.

    No, it isn't. As long as the source is available to anyone who asks for it, you're in the clear. For example, cheapbytes ( www.cheapbytes.com ) sell Linux CDs that contain binaries only. However, you can also purchase the source CD for $2-. If you have a CD burner, you can just burn and ship the source for anyone who asks for it, and charge a modest fee.

    If we used (for example) Red Hat Linux, it is my understanding that we can not just link to the source on the Red Hat website, as Red Hat is a "commercial" distribution. Is this correct?

    No, it's not at all correct. The problem is that it is woefully insufficient because you are not distributing it. The fact that someone else has the source on a public ftp site doesn't exhonerate you from your obligation to make the source available.

    Section 3c is discussing a situation where Joe user gets a binary-only CD from, say Cheapbytes. He wants to loan it to his friend for copying. 3c says he's allowed to do that. This doesn't really apply to you, because you are distributing it commercially. It's not fair for you to expect Redhat to provide ftp services for your commercial venture. However, it would also be unfair to require Joe user to order the source from Cheapbytes (just in case his friend wanted it two years later), or to require Joe User to set up an ftp service.

    If you already have an ftp/webserver, you could use that. Otherwise, you could just ship a "written offer" as outlined in the GPL, and burn/ship a CD for anyone who wants one ( probably almost noone, judging by the nature of the product )

    Cheers,