Tell that to Samsung. It takes them days after a Verizon Galaxy S3 over-the-air update AND an explicit GPL request using their OSS form on their website to get them to release sources.
- Eric On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Bruce Perens <[email protected]> wrote: > If the legal department has not already sanctioned the source code > release, you should certainly not even think of distributing a binary. All > of the mechanism to provide source must be in place before the binary goes > out. > > Under the terms of the GPL, the acceptable delay is zero. > > There are many ways to make money involving the GPL. This just isn't one > of them. > > Thanks > > Bruce > > > On 03/09/2014 12:06 PM, Olliver Schinagl wrote: > >> Hey list, >> >> I was talking to a friend the other day and it was discussed what the >> legal ramifications where on delayed release. >> >> Ignoring the use case specifically, if I would write a program, based on >> a GPLed program, I have to release source or accompany it with an offer to >> do so. Before releasing this code however, it will have to pass through the >> legal department for example where they sanction it all. So that introduces >> a delay. It could also be very much that a company would use that as an >> excuse, to delay the release of the code. >> >> How long of a delay would be acceptable? This is not a case where one >> would try to circumvent the release or anything. The intention is to >> release everything as expected, it is not used as some con to not release >> things as needed. It may merely be used as a way to maximize profits (its >> hard enough to earn money on OSS and OSHW, but lets not get into that >> argument). >> >> Thanks for your thoughts, >> >> Olliver >> >> > >
