[Gllug] [OT] Selling GPL

[Jason Clifford]

On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 15:47 +0000, Stephen Nelson-Smith wrote:
> Suppose a company has written a piece of software that uses some open
> source tools as a central part of the functionality.  For one part
> they've actually added to one of the tools some class methods and
> submitted them upstream.  The company has charged an amount for
> developing the software as a solution for a client.  It is clear that
> IPR remain with the company who wrote it.  Because the code uses GPL
> code, is it the case that it has to be released as GPL too?

IPR? What do you mean by that? Do you mean something other than
copyright? If so what? If not why not be clear and use the term
copyright which is clear in itself?

If the product simply aggregates GPL software and the suppliers own
additions to the mix are not derived from GPL they are free to license
the whole under any terms so long as it is clear the GPL components are
licensed under GPL and the recipient's rights made clear to them. 

If the suppliers own code is derived from or includes GPL code from
others they have to license it accordingly under GPL.

> The code is in two parts - one which produces a MySQL database, and
> one which queries that database and presents the results.  The client
> seems to want to have access to the database so they can write their
> own code to query and present the data.

Access to the database would surely be theirs anyway if the data is
delivered with the product. If access to the data is however sold as a
service and the data remains with the supplier then GPL is irrelevant to
that part of the discussion. It does not cover delivery of a service in
that way.

> How might such a situation best handled, from a business perspective?
> If the code to produce the DB is opensource, it can't be witheld it if
> the client don't pay an amount, but the company feels they ought to be
> charging a fee for access to it, as the real value is in the
> algorithms used to parse and produce the data.

Then ensure that part of the product is not GPL 'tainted' and charge
$large_amount for that part of the system.


> Incidentally, this raises a puzzling question in my mind.  In what
> sense is software ever released or licensed?  If I knock something
> together on  the train, am I obliged to release its source code right
> away? 

No and why would you be?

The obligations to release source under GPL only exist as a result of
distribution.

>  What about if I check out some GPL code into a branch and hack
> on it - at what stage am I obliged to publish it?  

Never.

> In our example case, the SQL to produce the database - why would that be GPL?

The actual SQL statements would not be GPL unless they were included in
a GPL licensed distribution of code.

>  Suppose I decided I didn't want to 'release' some software - I just
> wanted to host it on a private server and charge people to use it.  Is
> the rule that if the code is GPL I must release it if requested?

Nothing to do with GPL. You would not be distributing the code. GPL does
not prevent you running a service using it and charging for that
service.



-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug