Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Nov 2010 17:10 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 448017
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: the 'spirit' of gpl
by Adurbe on Mon 1st Nov 2010 18:34
in reply to "RE: the 'spirit' of gpl"
RE[3]: the 'spirit' of gpl
by red_devel on Mon 1st Nov 2010 21:34
in reply to "RE[2]: the 'spirit' of gpl"
What right have you lost by it being included on the store?
I've lost the right to redistribute that binary to whoever I want, according to Apple's App Store Term of Service. This is in violation of the GPL, both by the letter AND spirit of the law. It should be removed as well as all apps using GPL'd code or Apple should change their policy, period.
RE[3]: the 'spirit' of gpl
by lemur2 on Mon 1st Nov 2010 23:47
in reply to "RE[2]: the 'spirit' of gpl"
What right have you lost by it being included on the store?
I appreciate Apple's store in unpopular in certain quarters, for a host of reasons, but I genuinely dont see where its restrictions are relevant to the aims of GPL licence.
I appreciate Apple's store in unpopular in certain quarters, for a host of reasons, but I genuinely dont see where its restrictions are relevant to the aims of GPL licence.
It is relevant because there are restrictions which aren't in the GPL license.
The code doesn't belong to the App Store.
The only way that the App Store has required-by-law permission to distribute the code (that isn't theirs) is to abide by the GPL license. That means adding no extra restrictions (whatever they are). None at all. As soon as the App Store adds extra restrictions, they violate the terms of the GPL, and as a consequence they have no permission to distribute the code.
Distributing someone else's code without permission is a violation of copyright law.





Member since:
2006-01-24
A licence that exists to protect rights of end users should change to accomodate a locked-in environment which places huge restrictions on end users? Are you serious?