Changeset - dfcd7ef4aeae
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Martin Michlmayr (tbm) - 10 years ago 2014-04-24 23:12:21
tbm@cyrius.com
Consistent usage of "noncommercial"
1 file changed with 1 insertions and 1 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
compliance-guide.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -341,193 +341,193 @@ obligations far beyond your last binary distribution.
 
Compliance under this option is straightforward.  If you ship a product
 
that includes binary copies of GPL'd software (e.g., in firmware, or on a
 
hard drive, CD, or other permanent storage medium), you can store the
 
Corresponding Source alongside the binaries.  Alternatively, you can
 
include the source on a CD or other removable storage medium in the box
 
containing the product.
 

	
 
GPLv2 refers to the various storage mechanisms as ``medi[a] customarily
 
used for software interchange''.  While the Internet has attained primacy
 
as a means of software distribution where super-fast Internet connections
 
are available, GPLv2 was written at a time when downloading software was
 
not practical (and was often impossible).  For much of the world, this
 
condition has not changed since GPLv2's publication, and the Internet
 
still cannot be considered ``a medium customary for software
 
interchange''.  GPLv3 clarifies this matter, requiring that source be
 
``fixed on a durable physical medium customarily used for software
 
interchange''.  This language affirms that option (a) requires binary
 
redistributors to provide source on a physical medium.
 

	
 
Please note that while selection of option (a) requires distribution on a
 
physical medium, voluntary distribution via the Internet is very useful.  This
 
is discussed in detail in \S~\ref{offer-with-internet}.
 

	
 
\subsection{Option (b): The Offer}
 
\label{offer-for-source}
 

	
 
Many distributors prefer to ship only an offer for source with the binary
 
distribution, rather than the complete source package.  This
 
option has value when the cost of source distribution is a true
 
per-unit cost.  For example, this option might be a good choice for
 
embedded products with permanent storage too small to fit the source, and
 
which are not otherwise shipped with a CD but \emph{are} shipped with a
 
manual or other printed material.
 

	
 
However, this option increases the duration of your obligations
 
dramatically.  An offer for source must be good for three full years from
 
your last binary distribution (under GPLv2), or your last binary or spare
 
part distribution (under GPLv3).  Your source code request and
 
provisioning system must be designed to last much longer than your product
 
life cycle.
 

	
 
In addition, if you are required to comply with the terms of GPLv2, you
 
{\bf cannot} use a network service to provide the source code.  For GPLv2,
 
the source code offer is fulfilled only with physical media.  This usually
 
means that you must continue to produce an up-to-date ``source code CD''
 
for years after the product's end-of-life.
 

	
 
\label{offer-with-internet}
 

	
 
Under GPLv2, it is acceptable and advisable for your offer for source code
 
to include an Internet link for downloadable source \emph{in addition} to
 
offering source on a physical medium.  This practice enables those with
 
fast network connections to get the source more quickly, and typically
 
decreases the number of physical media fulfillment requests.
 
(GPLv3~\S~6(b) permits provision of source with a public
 
network-accessible distribution only and no physical media.  We discuss
 
this in detail at the end of this section.)
 

	
 
The following is a suggested compliant offer for source under GPLv2 (and
 
is also acceptable for GPLv3) that you would include in your printed
 
materials accompanying each binary distribution:
 

	
 
\begin{quote}
 
The software included in this product contains copyrighted software that
 
is licensed under the GPL\@.  A copy of that license is included in this
 
document on page $X$\@.  You may obtain the complete Corresponding Source
 
code from us for a period of three years after our last shipment of this
 
product, which will be no earlier than 2011-08-01, by sending a money
 
order or check for \$5 to: \\
 
GPL Compliance Division \\
 
Our Company \\
 
Any Town, US 99999 \\
 
\\
 
Please write ``source for product $Y$'' in the memo line of your
 
payment.
 

	
 
You may also find a copy of the source at
 
\verb0http://www.example.com/sources/Y/0.
 

	
 
This offer is valid to anyone in receipt of this information.
 
\end{quote}
 

	
 
There are a few important details about this offer.  First, it requires a
 
copying fee.  GPLv2 permits ``a charge no more than your cost of
 
physically performing source distribution''.  This fee must be reasonable.
 
If your cost of copying and mailing a CD is more than around \$10, you
 
should perhaps find a cheaper CD stock and shipment method.  It is simply
 
not in your interest to try to overcharge the community.  Abuse of this
 
provision in order to make a for-profit enterprise of source code
 
provision will likely trigger enforcement action.
 

	
 
Second, note that the last line makes the offer valid to anyone who
 
requests the source.  This is because v2~\S~3(b) requires that offers be
 
``to give any third party'' a copy of the Corresponding Source.  GPLv3 has
 
a similar requirement, stating that an offer must be valid for ``anyone
 
who possesses the object code''.  These requirements indicated in
 
v2~\S~3(c) and v3~\S~6(c) are so that non-commercial redistributors may
 
v2~\S~3(c) and v3~\S~6(c) are so that noncommercial redistributors may
 
pass these offers along with their distributions.  Therefore, the offers
 
must be valid not only to your customers, but also to anyone who received
 
a copy of the binaries from them.  Many distributors overlook this
 
requirement and assume that they are only required to fulfill a request
 
from their direct customers.
 

	
 
The option to provide an offer for source rather than direct source
 
distribution is a special benefit to companies equipped to handle a
 
fulfillment process.  GPLv2~\S~3(c) and GPLv3~\S~6(c) avoid burdening
 
noncommercial, occasional redistributors with fulfillment request
 
obligations by allowing them to pass along the offer for source as they
 
received it.
 

	
 
Note that commercial redistributors cannot avail themselves of the option
 
(c) exception, and so while your offer for source must be good to anyone
 
who receives the offer (under v2) or the object code (under v3), it
 
\emph{cannot} extinguish the obligations of anyone who commercially
 
redistributes your product.  The license terms apply to anyone who
 
distributes GPL'd software, regardless of whether they are the original
 
distributor.  Take the example of Vendor $V$, who develops a software
 
platform from GPL'd sources for use in embedded devices.  Manufacturer $M$
 
contracts with $V$ to install the software as firmware in $M$'s device.
 
$V$ provides the software to $M$, along with a compliant offer for source.
 
In this situation, $M$ cannot simply pass $V$'s offer for source along to
 
its customers.  $M$ also distributes the GPL'd software commercially, so
 
$M$ too must comply with the GPL and provide source (or $M$'s \emph{own}
 
offer for source) to $M$'s customers.
 

	
 
This situation illustrates that the offer for source is often a poor
 
choice for products that your customers will likely redistribute.  If you
 
include the source itself with the products, then your distribution to
 
your customers is compliant, and their (unmodified) distribution to their
 
customers is likewise compliant, because both include source.  If you
 
include only an offer for source, your distribution is compliant but your
 
customer's distribution does not ``inherit'' that compliance, because they
 
have not made their own offer to accompany their distribution.
 

	
 
The terms related to the offer for source are quite different if you
 
distribute under GPLv3.  Under v3, you may make source available only over
 
a network server, as long as it is available to the general public and
 
remains active for three years from the last distribution of your product
 
or related spare part.  Accordingly, you may satisfy your fulfillment
 
obligations via Internet-only distribution.  This makes the ``offer for
 
source'' option less troublesome for v3-only distributions, easing
 
compliance for commercial redistributors.  However, before you switch to a
 
purely Internet-based fulfillment process, you must first confirm that you
 
can actually distribute \emph{all} of the software under GPLv3.  Some
 
programs are indeed licensed under ``GPLv2, \emph{or any later version}''
 
(often abbreviated ``GPLv2-or-later'').  Such licensing gives you the
 
option to redistribute under GPLv3.  However, a few popular programs are
 
only licensed under GPLv2 and not ``or any later version''
 
(``GPLv2-only'').  You cannot provide only Internet-based source request
 
fulfillment for the latter programs.
 

	
 
If you determine that all GPL'd works in your whole product allow upgrade
 
to GPLv3 (or were already GPLv3'd to start), your offer for source may be
 
as simple as this:
 

	
 
\begin{quote}
 
The software included in this product contains copyrighted software that
 
is licensed under the GPLv3\@.  A copy of that license is included in this
 
document on page $X$\@.  You may obtain the complete Corresponding Source
 
code from us for a period of three years after our last shipment of this
 
product and/or spare parts therefor, which will be no earlier than
 
2011-08-01, on our website at
 
\verb0http://www.example.com/sources/productnum/0.
 
\end{quote}
 

	
 
\medskip
 

	
 
Under both GPLv2 and GPLv3, source offers must be accompanied by a copy of
 
the license itself, either electronically or in print, with every
 
distribution.
 
 
 
Finally, it is unacceptable to use option (b) merely because you do not have
 
Corresponding Source ready.  We find that some companies chose this option
 
because writing an offer is easy, but producing a source distribution as
 
an afterthought to a hasty development process is difficult.  The offer
 
for source does not exist as a stop-gap solution for companies rushing to
 
market with an out-of-compliance product.  If you ship an offer for source
 
with your product but cannot actually deliver \emph{immediately} on that
 
offer when your customers receive it, you should expect an enforcement
 
action.
 

	
 
\subsection{Option (c): Noncommercial Offers}
 

	
 
As discussed in the last section, GPLv2~\S~3(c) and GPLv3~\S~6(c) apply
 
only to noncommercial use.  These options are not available to businesses
 
distributing GPL'd software.  Consequently, companies who redistribute
 
software packaged for them by an upstream vendor cannot merely pass along
 
the offer they received from the vendor; they must provide their own offer
 
or corresponding source to their distributees.  We talk in detail about
 
upstream software providers in \S~\ref{upstream}.
 

	
 
\subsection{Option 6(d) in GPLv3: Internet Distribution}
 

	
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)