[Gllug] Re: Gllug Digest, Vol 20, Issue 33

[Doug Winter]

Mike Brodbelt wrote:
> IANAL, but I believe your interpretation is wrong here. I do not think
> packaging up software and using it internally is considered distribution
> for the purposes of the GPL. If the software was distributed to anyone
> outside the company then there would be no question, but for purely
> internal use I believe they are not in breach of the licence. The
> company would be considered as a single entity for legal purposes.

It's an interesting question.  The GPL FAQ agrees with you:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#InternalDistribution

However (and IANAL obviously) AIUI there is nothing the GPL that defines 
distribution (just like they don't define derivative), but instead it 
relies on the local copyright laws.

I don't think copyright (at least in .uk) makes any distinction between 
distribution to your mother and distribution to a co-worker.  If I copy 
a copyrighted album and give that copy to a co-worker I'm still in 
breach of copyright, not just for the act of copying but for 
distributing the copy.

So I'm not sure where that interpretation in the FAQ comes from?

doug.

-- 
6973E2CF: 2C95 66AD 1596 37D2 41FC 609F 76C0 A4EC 6973 E2CF
http://adju.st/
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug