imagicos

[Michael Karcher]

Am Sonntag, den 08.02.2009, 02:57 +1100 schrieb Ben Klein:
> > And even if they are in some way vilolating the GPL by not hosting the
> > operating systems source
> 
> Not the problem.
> 1) Source of individual apps can be retrieved from appropriate
> websites. As long as the websites are referenced in the distro's
> documentation of each app, they're within the grounds of GPL.
First, I am not a lawyer. But the GPL (version 2) says that you have to
provide the source code *yourself*. Either by shipping it together with
the binaries (section 3a) or by giving you a written offer that they
will provide the sourcode to *anyone* who asks for it for a cost not
higher than the costs of performing the distribution (section 3b). If
you are a noncommercial entity (which iMagic OS definitely is not),
passing on the written offer is also enough (section 3c). Finally, if
you distribute by offering a download, you have to offer a source
download *from the same place* (last paragraph of section 3).

> 2) They don't have to license their own code written for the distro under GPL
Correct. But only if they don't link GPL libraries.

> What it seems to me is that they are selling binaries, not support.
> They could be selling licenses (for Crossover, mp3 etc), but that's
> not a matter for us to resolve. If it is determined that what they are
> selling is binaries, then I'm almost certain that is a violation of
> GPL.
No, it is not. You may charge as much as you want for binaries of GPL
programs. You just have to allow your clients to pass it on for free.

> From memory, GPL allows you to charge for the cost of delivering the
> software (e.g. CD media, postage), but not the binaries themselves.
This just applies to the source code.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher