52 Bicycles

The FSF posted the GPLv3, 2nd discussion draft that contains the following paragraphs:

6.[3] Conveying Non-Source Forms.

You may copy and convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways…

d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place, and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no extra charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code.

[If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you have explicitly arranged with the operator of that server to keep the Corresponding Source available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements, and provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source.] …

The Corresponding Source conveyed in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly documented, with an implementation available to the public in source code form, and must require no special password or key for unpacking, reading or copying.

This is going to change the game for hosted software using GPL software. I’ve written before about hosted software as exploiting a loophole. The hole is closing, which is in the spirit of the FSF, though perhaps alarming to some of my fellow entrepreneurs.

Now if you make changes to GPL software (e.g. mysql, linux, etc) or - and this is key - create software statically linked to GPL software, and host those changes on a server, you will need to distribute the code. And GPL licenses have an “auto-upgrade” provision, such that the latest version will rule the day. Interestingly, MySQL decided to change their license to avoid this situation:

“MySQL AB continues to work with the Free Software Foundation for GPLv3 to be the new widespread licence under which free software is licensed,” Arnö wrote in a blog posting in December. “However, until we get clear and strong indications for the general acceptance of GPLv3 over GPLv2, we feel comfortable with a specific GPLv2 reference in our licence.”

Will be interesting to see how my colleagues address this issue. This will not affect us much because though we use FOSS for some of our components, we were never hosted, so we always had to avoid GPL. Instead of Linux, FreeBSD. Instead of MySQL, Postgres. Etc. Might be worth digging out my Open Source Conference notes from last year.

(Hat tip to Alex Muse, former Bostonian, for reminding me of this emerging subject)

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 13th, 2007 at 8:14 pm and is filed under Technology Business. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed. Reddit This