..on Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 01:15:17AM +0200, Paul Furber wrote: > On Dec 5, 2007 1:18 PM, Jan Ciger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well, but the practical consequence is that you cannot use it for a > > non-free project (with closed source) unless it is something for > > in-house use only (what is a game good for if you cannot distribute > > it?). > > > Absolutely right. It's just that I have just come across _huge_ inhouse > projects (including at least one game!) that used GPLed code perfectly > legally because the company wasn't ever intending to redistribute the code, > either because it wasn't their core business to distribute software or > because it was simply an inhouse support project only.
you are correct. redistribution itself is not compulsory with the GPL, and so GPL'd code is often used entirely 'indoors' to serve the internal needs of a company. it's arguable most of the worlds GPL code is used and modified without consequent redistribution, and as such, completely legally. from what i understand, many 'closed' development environments would consider the GPL ideal an ideal license in this regard. i am curious however: you gave the example of a game being developed using GPL'd code with no intention of redistribtion. what sort of game was this? :wq -- julian oliver http://julianoliver.com http://selectparks.net _______________________________________________ Soya-user mailing list Soya-user@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/soya-user
