[Ilugc] Regarding FOSS

Binand Sethumadhavan binand at gmail.com
Tue Jun 20 09:54:58 IST 2006

On 17/06/06, Vamsee Kanakala <vamlists at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Suppose i say, i have an application which is Licensed GPL, but you
> > need to
> > pay Rs.x to get the source as well as binary, will this be considered
> > under
> > FOSS or simply Open Source Software?

> It will be considered a GPL violation. As GPL says, if you use GPLed
> software, or make modifications to it and re-distribute it, you should
> make the source, with the modifications, available for free. That

I don't think the GPL goes to that extend. It only says that, you need
to provide the source with the modifications ONLY to the person(s) to
whom you actually distributed the binaries. You are even allowed to
charge reasonably to cover your distribution costs (cost of a
CD+burning charges, or cost of your bandwidth).

If you develop fubar v1.0 which links to GPL'ed library libbaz, then
you can charge the moon for fubar, but your customer has a right (the
four freedoms) to the full source code and he can even recompile it,
removing any branding you may have included, and sell it for a
fraction of your price. Thus, the end user is the winner, in that he
has the choice of picking the best distribution of fubar v1.0 - your
pricey version for which you may provide 24x7 support and free
training, or the other version which is
download-use-but-don't-bother-us, with support only via a Yahoo group
or a wiki or a forum or something of that sort. See how RHEL and
CentOS co-exist in the world.


More information about the ilugc mailing list