[Qgis-developer] QIGS GPL -> LGPL - Tigers, Lions and Bears Oh My!

[Tim Sutton]

Hi Noli

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Noli Sicad <nsicad at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Marco,
>
>> GPL does not require to publish changes / plugins to everyone. E.g. say you
>> create a plugin for a contractor, if you give them the binary and a source
>> tarball, it's all fine with GPL, and there is no requirement for you or the
>> contractor to publish the plugin to the public.
>
> This is interesting take about GPL and QGIS plugins.
>
> It means that the QGIS plugins is LGPL in this case.
>
> If It is GPL, we the public can demand that QGIS plugin should be
> available publicly both the source and binary.
>
> Is the QGIS plugins, LGPL?
>
> What do other thinks about Marco's interpretation about GPL and the
> QGIS plugins, not available for everyone - i.e. " there is no
> requirement for you or the  contractor to publish the plugin to the
> public".

The GPL and LGPL only take effect on *distribution*. This means if you
build software for in-house (e.g. to be used only within your
organisation) there is no need to release the source code. So an
organisation can pay a contractor to do work for them and never make
it public.

Regards

Tim

>
> Noli
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>



-- 
Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release  Manager)
==============================================
Please do not email me off-list with technical
support questions. Using the lists will gain
more exposure for your issues and the knowledge
surrounding your issue will be shared with all.

Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about:
 * QGIS programming and support services
 * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans
 * FOSS Consulting Services
Skype: timlinux
Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
==============================================