1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:zen%40lapisonline.com">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="000800.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="000805.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</H1>
<B>zen</B>
<A HREF="mailto:zen%40lapisonline.com"
TITLE="GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question">zen@lapisonline.com</A><BR>
<I>Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:31:20 +0800</I>
<P><UL>
<LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000800.html">GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</A></li>
<LI> Next message: <A HREF="000805.html">GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#801">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#801">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#801">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#801">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>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" <<A HREF="mailto:skander@WPI.EDU">skander@WPI.EDU</A>>
To: <<A HREF="mailto:nel@nevrax.org">nel@nevrax.org</A>>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:07 AM
Subject: GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question
><i>
</I>><i> On Thursday 13 December 2001 09:49, Vincent Archer wrote:
</I>><i> > Whenever you get a GPLed program (and the license on the NeL library
</I>><i> > is such that a program linked to it must be GPL too), under any form,
</I>><i> > you must also be able to access/request/get a copy of the source.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > So anybody who has a Ryzom client has the right to access the source.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > Of course, until there IS an official client, almost no one outside
</I>><i> > Nevrax has that right :)
</I>><i>
</I>><i> I don't want to drag this out eternally, but I see a little lapse of
</I>><i> reasoning. Technically speaking, the development version of Ryzom is
</I>probably
><i> currently being linked and tested with NeL, therefore, Ryzom must inherit
</I>the
><i> GPL.
</I>><i> Therefore, the current development code is in the public domain, therefore
</I>><i> should be published. Of course, I understand your need to keep Ryzom
</I>"secret"
><i> until it is done, releasable and sellable, so that you can put food on
</I>your
><i> plates (and buy big cars for your Venture Capital people), yet, isn't this
</I>><i> secrecy a violation of the GPL, since Ryzom is GPL'd?
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Wouldn't it be better then, for Nevrax, if NeL was LGPL, and thereby
</I>making
><i> it legal (or rather, in accordance to the GPL) for you to keep Ryzom from
</I>><i> public eyes?
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Just thinking out loud...
</I>><i>
</I>><i> -Kai
</I>><i> _______________________________________________
</I>><i> Nel mailing list
</I>><i> <A HREF="mailto:Nel@nevrax.org">Nel@nevrax.org</A>
</I>><i> <A HREF="/mailman/listinfo.cgi/nel">/mailman/listinfo.cgi/nel</A>
</I>><i>
</I>
</pre>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI> Previous message: <A HREF="000800.html">GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</A></li>
<LI> Next message: <A HREF="000805.html">GPL specifics -- was: [Nel] Gamer question</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#801">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#801">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#801">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#801">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
</body></html>
|
