GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question

Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:31:20 +0800

Hi Kai,
+
+To my understanding, you don't have to release the source code if you don't
+sell it, according to GPL. Surely you may release the code in development,
+but it's not obligatory.
+
+Keep up the good work, guys.
+
+----- Original Message -----
+From: "Kai Schutte" <skander@WPI.EDU>
+To: <nel@nevrax.org>
+Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:07 AM
+Subject: GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question
+
+
+>
+> On Thursday 13 December 2001 09:49, Vincent Archer wrote:
+> > Whenever you get a GPLed program (and the license on the NeL library
+> > is such that a program linked to it must be GPL too), under any form,
+> > you must also be able to access/request/get a copy of the source.
+> >
+> > So anybody who has a Ryzom client has the right to access the source.
+> >
+> > Of course, until there IS an official client, almost no one outside
+> > Nevrax has that right :)
+>
+> I don't want to drag this out eternally, but I see a little lapse of
+> reasoning. Technically speaking, the development version of Ryzom is
+probably
+> currently being linked and tested with NeL, therefore, Ryzom must inherit
+the
+> GPL.
+> Therefore, the current development code is in the public domain, therefore
+> should be published. Of course, I understand your need to keep Ryzom
+"secret"
+> until it is done, releasable and sellable, so that you can put food on
+your
+> plates (and buy big cars for your Venture Capital people), yet, isn't this
+> secrecy a violation of the GPL, since Ryzom is GPL'd?
+>
+> Wouldn't it be better then, for Nevrax, if NeL was LGPL, and thereby
+making
+> it legal (or rather, in accordance to the GPL) for you to keep Ryzom from
+> public eyes?
+>
+> Just thinking out loud...
+>
+> -Kai
+> _______________________________________________
+> Nel mailing list
+> Nel@nevrax.org
+> http://www.nevrax.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/nel
+>
+
+
+