TalkChess.com

Steven Atkinson · Joined: 13 Oct 2010 Posts: 453 Location: Australia

Also, the GPL stipulates that source must be distributed.

These market places generally ignore this for two reasons.

1. Their deceitfulness will be revealed
2. They don't want other lowlife doing the same thing as themselves.

Go ask them for the source code for me will you Razz

It should be prominent.

Steve Maughan · Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 487 Location: Florida, USA

Hi Steven,

See above re deceit by omission.

As for the support issue. It's not clear if the seller can or cannot support the product. So since we don't know, we certainly cannot pass judgment on them.

Steve

Steve Maughan · Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 487 Location: Florida, USA

All of my comments assume that the author has complied with the GPL. If they haven't then they are in the wrong.

Steven Atkinson · Joined: 13 Oct 2010 Posts: 453 Location: Australia

I understand your position.
Charging for GPLed programs is allowable.

But seriously, please ask a couple of them for the source code for me.

I am the project owner of the GPLed Hammer of Thyrion project which was cloned by someone on Android. His project had bad reviews and multiple unresolved bug reports, he refused to provide source (we tried repeatedly as my co-programmer is a perfectionist and was curious), and he had multiple cloned projects, all of which had no source and were often broken.
After months/years(?), the Apps were removed for GPL breach and author deregistered.

Jon Dart

Not to single anyone out, but I am amazed reading this thread how many have little understanding of GPL, or copyright.

If you own the software (have the copyright) and the software is released under GPL, you can re-license it under any license you want, compatible with GPL, or not. GPL prohibits other people from doing this, but not the owner. For example, mySQL can be obtained under a GPL license but you can also pay for a commercial license from the owner, Oracle, that exempts you from GPL requirements (http://mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/oem/#4).

So, if the App Store rules are incompatible with GPL that is not a problem, as long as the copyright owner is releasing it under the App Store agreement. If someone else does that, they are violating GPL and probably you can get Apple to take them down. although I don't have experience with Apple's policies. (I think going through Apple is a better route than trying to call them out directly for a GPL violation, because unless you want to hire a lawyer and sue, there is little you can actually do about that).

Btw., there is nothing in GPL itself that prohibits selling GPL software, even though it may be obtainable elsewhere for free, if you comply with the other GPL requirements. (As noted though App Store has other rules).

Julien MARCEL · Joined: 05 May 2008 Posts: 2289 Location: Nantes (France)

Jon Dart

But I am saying it actually is illegal, to distribute a clone in the App Store.

Selling GPL software in some other fashion is kind of a theoretical discussion (I don't think this is common) but you might want to see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html.

--Jon

Julien MARCEL · Joined: 05 May 2008 Posts: 2289 Location: Nantes (France)

Jon Dart

Ok, my comments were not directed specifically at you (A good part of the thread is about GPL, and is confused, IMO). RMS doesn't think it is unethical but I'm not sure I agree.

--Jon

Steve Maughan · Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 487 Location: Florida, USA

Hi Jon,

All of my comments assume that the seller is in compliance with the GPL license. If indeed the App Store violates the GPL license then I think Apple should taker this up. And I do think that the clones devalue the App Store. But then again, they are getting 30% of the revenue.

If a GPL App Store app provide a link to the source in the About screen would that satisfy the license?

Best regards,

Steve