Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Nov 2010 17:10 UTC
Apple Do you like VLC on your iPhone or iPad? You don't yet have it installed, but want to? Well, then you'd better be quick about it, as some VLC contributors are unhappy with the fact that VLC is distributed through Apple's App Store, violating the GPL the video player is licensed under. At least, that's what some think.
Thread beginning with comment 448116
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: No worries
by fewt on Tue 2nd Nov 2010 00:24 UTC in reply to "RE: No worries"
Member since:

"In this case the spirit of the GPL is, I believe, upheld. The source code is available and you can get to it from the application itself.

No it isn't.

The spirit of the GPL license is that when one party (e.g. the App Store) receives the code under GPL terms, if that party wishes to re-distribute the code (as is the very function of the App Store), then downstream recipients must receive the code under the exact same terms and conditions that the first party received it under.

This is only fair, after all. The same rights for everyone, even if they happen to be iPhone or iPad users.

No added restrictions, no extra ifs, buts or maybes.

If the App Store is unable to pass the code on to downstream recipients under the exact same terms and conditions as the App Store received the code, then under the license for that code the App Store has NO permission to pass it on at all.

Under copyright law, a party is required to get permission (in the form of a license) in order to pass on code to downstream recipients. The App Store doesn't have that permission, it has no license.

The source code is available, so per GPL v2, all of the conditions for redistribution have been met.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: No worries
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 2nd Nov 2010 00:34 in reply to "RE[2]: No worries"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:

Please, you're just embarassing yourself now. It's clear you do not understand the GPL one bit. Access to the source code is not the ONLY requirement for redistribution. Another requirement, as has been pointed out 7472846657838364 times in this thread alone, is that no additional restrictions may be placed upon the application, yet, this is exactly what Apple does, e.g. by limiting it to only five devices.

Ergo, Apple, as distributor, is violating the GPL.

This is GPL 101.

Reply Parent Score: 1

v RE[4]: No worries
by fewt on Tue 2nd Nov 2010 00:46 in reply to "RE[3]: No worries"
RE[3]: No worries
by lemur2 on Tue 2nd Nov 2010 03:01 in reply to "RE[2]: No worries"
lemur2 Member since:

The source code is available, so per GPL v2, all of the conditions for redistribution have been met.

No, only one of the conditions has been met. A condition that has not been met is that downstream recipients of code (i.e. iPhone or iPad users must get the same terms and conditions, with no extra restrictions or provisos added, as the distributor, App Store, got the code).
Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.

App Store doesn't meet that condition.

Reply Parent Score: 2