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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 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 Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!69.16.185.11.MISMATCH!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: MinGW Ada compiler licence question targeting commercial applications References: <4a3a1fd6$0$30224$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <9331a174-96f7-4551-bc74-3d6946eb9d01@k20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> <2e018078-f9ef-4b01-9cf6-08a6aab979e8@s16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> <4A3AA94E.7080401@obry.net> <63138281-efb8-42f0-a551-015372d5d900@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com> From: Stephen Leake Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:06:33 -0400 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:4l+0rNJKq9GDSLbGWz10G7Kfa/8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com X-Trace: 12fa04a3b38ebe9cadf9d31768 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6530 Date: 2009-06-19T03:06:33-04:00 List-Id: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Hibou57 (Yannick Duch=EAne)" writes: > Hi Pascal, > > On 18 juin, 22:53, Pascal Obry 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.=20 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),=20 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. =2D-=20 =2D- Stephe --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) iEYEARECAAYFAko7OQAACgkQyY7DcdmbnL3QawCff3xTPg8ax8Kx7gOpJzATFH2V yh8AmQE3sW6AcjoMTA5xz0fA5Q1uO67/ =j/1t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--