From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,c92999d3d36edb6c X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: anon@anon.org (anon) Subject: Re: MinGW Ada compiler licence question targeting commercial Reply-To: anon@anon.org (anon) References: <01527aaf-991b-447b-a516-7dbe6b345650@j20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:33:50 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.65.18.124 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1245393230 12.65.18.124 (Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:33:50 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:33:50 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6529 Date: 2009-06-19T06:33:50+00:00 List-Id: Actually, GNAT uses GPL version 1, 2, and 3. And you can still download binary versions of GNAT for Linux that are licenced under GPL version 1. Now, GNAT GPL 2009 uses both version 2 and 3 ( GNAT files: "copying", and "copying3" ). Using "Copying3" which may contain additions or changes to the GPL version 3 license that Adacore prefers for GNAT instead of the FSF general version. The GPL only forces the supplier of the object (compiled aka Non-Source Forms) code to make available the source code. There is no statement or phase in the GPL version 3, or 2, or even 1 that states the source code must be "FREE" except for accessing the source on networks. Version 3: From the Preamble ( Third paragraph ) When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. ... Version 3: 4. Conveying Verbatim Copies. You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice; keep intact all notices stating that this License and any non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code; keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program. You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee. This allows one to set a price, for source code. But this does not stop one from charging another price for the object (compiled aka Non-Source Forms) code. Plus, the third parties may want to pay for: 1. source code only, or 2. object code only, or 3. both object and source code. Plus, Version 3: 6. Conveying Non-Source Forms. b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge. Subparagraph (6.b) does not allow anyone without right from Adacore to sell any part of GNAT or its tool suite, except for maintaining, downloading and compiling the program. And that price must be no more than a "reasonable cost" for someone to perform those task! d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further 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 (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements. Subparagraph (6.d) allows the object and source codes to be split from each other. Also, "Corresponding Source' may be omitted in the case of where the source would cause a "Patent Infringement" so giving a compiled object module may be required. Another case is where the software accesses libraries that have a national security concerns. Like using a "Cryptographic Module" or library that might be available to one country but not all. Plus, businesses understand that the cost of a software engineer to download, compile and maintain the source code is too expensive. They prefer the initial system to be compiled on a CD/DVD with printed documentations. Because, if one is setting up a "roll your own" system for a client, like using GPL system the cost may be too high. Like using Linux with GNAT may contain 1000s of GPL software packages and with the cost of that CD/DVD that is less than $5.00, but the cost of compiling and modifying each package may cost $1,000 or more depending upon the system and the number of packages to be installed. That's why most businesses prefer their software engineer to install Linux from companies like Debian, RedHat or SuSE for their open source systems. Also, they sometime prefer the non in-house software engineer to keep the software, that way the software engineer can update the software as the patches become available. And install these updates periodically. In <01527aaf-991b-447b-a516-7dbe6b345650@j20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, Ludovic Brenta writes: >anon wrote on comp.lang.ada: >> The license is for the GNAT compiler and tool suite. =A0You can freely do= >wnload >> and modify any to all GNAT programs but you can not sell GNAT or its tool= >s >> suite unless you obtain the rights from Adacore. =A0You can charge for th= >e time >> downloading, and the time you spend modifying and compiling GNAT as well >> as the cost of the storage media (CD). =A0But that's it! > >No, that's entirely wrong. GNAT is licensed under the GPL which >explicitly allows one to charge for copies of the software. I could >legally sell you a single copy of GNAT for One... Million... Dollars >if you were willing to pay. The first catch is that *if* I sell (or >give away) a copy of GNAT, then I must also sell (or give away) the >sources along with it, at no *extra* cost. If the copy I sell or give >is modified, then the sources that I must sell or give along are the >modified sources. The second catch is that *you* are legally allowed >to re-sell (or give away) copies of the software to anyone, under the >same conditions. > >> Now, if you use GNAT, you can build a commercial program, but the GPL 2 a= >nd >> 3 will force you to use a GPL or GPL-like license for your commerical pro= >ject. >> That is, the source code must be available for those who use your program= >.. > >That is not true either. The source code must only be available to >those who receive a copy of the program; not to those who use the >program. Think "software as a service": a customer can use a program >over the network without receiving a copy of it. In this case, the >vendor does not distribute the program at all, so is not required to >disclose the sources. > >The GNU Affero General Public License[1] is an alternative to the GPL >that does require vendors of such services to provide the sources. >Neither GNAT nor its run-time library use this license. > >[1] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html > =A0 >> You can sell the binaries for $xx.xx, and you may either give the source = >if >> they ask or in some cases you can charge addition $yy.yy for the source. > >The "addition" must be no more than the cost of physically copying the >sources, i.e. zero in the age of the Internet, or perhaps one euro for >a CD-ROM. > >-- >Ludovic Brenta.