Re: MinGW Ada compiler licence question targeting commercial applications

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1656 bytes --]

"Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> Hi Pascal,
>
> On 18 juin, 22:53, Pascal Obry <pas...@obry.net> wrote:
>> I'm not a lawyer either but it seems to me that your question is not
>> about making a commercial application but a closed source one.
>>
>> Pascal.
>>
> Not really. As I've said before, the probleme with GPL is not about
> source code access, but about the fact that if a single instance is
> sold, then this will allow it ot be distributed with no charge. 

Which paragraph of the GPL says this? I don't believe this is correct.

The main point of the GPL is that if you distribute the binary (with
or without charge), you must also distribute the source (with a
reasonable charge).

> This is not a matter of source code (I do not bother to provide source
> code for owner of a binary copy), 

If you don't want to be required to distribute source, you cannot use
GPL code.

The MinGW Ada compiler runtime library is GPL, unless you get it from
AdaCore via a support contract, in which case it is GMGPL (GNAT
Modified GPL), which removes the source distribution requirement.

You need to talk to a lawyer.

> By the way, I'm a bit afraid too that provinding source code will be
> interpreted as a right to distribute for free (a matter of trust).

All rights are documented in the license. Whether people follow the
license is a separate question, but it can be very expensive to
enforce a restriction.

The GPL says the user must have access to the source, and can do
whatever they want with the software, including distributing new
binaries for free.

-- 
-- Stephe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 193 bytes --]