Question about this Sveasoft/GPL Controversy...

[KeyserSoze]

For you all that don't know what I'm talking about, Sveasoft released a firmware for the Linksys WRT54G Router, which adds a ton of features. The original firmware was released under the GPL from Linksys, because they used GPL softare to develop it.

In the case of Sveasoft, they recently starting charging people for the firmware. This has gotten a bunch of people upset, saying that they can not do this as part of the GPL. I was under the assumption that you can take code that is licensed under the GPL, add your own code to it, and sell it for profit from there. I mean, isn't that what Red Hat does? (I know they offer it free as well.) But I thought this was legal. Or is it not?

Someone enlighten me please.





KeyserSoze

 

[Schrodinger]

As long as Sveasoft offers the source code modifications they've made to their firmware to paying customers (the source must accompany the binary) then its okay and adheres to the GPL.

Nothing in the GPL forces them to give everyone the source code, nor does it mean they can't charge. Just that source must be accessible (accompany the binaries in most cases) to those who are allowed to use the software (can be limited to paying customers).

Nothing wrong with that. Linksys did worse junk. They wouldn't even release the GPL code for their routers until a backlash hit them. Even now what they release is not the same the firmware they distribute. I was working on a little mod to my WRT54G and leared that some of the files differ and some are outright not in the source distribution. Seattle Wireless (I think?) has more about the WRT54G if you are interested.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by: Schrodinger
As long as Sveasoft offers the source code modifications they've made to their firmware to paying customers (the source must accompany the binary) then its okay and adheres to the GPL.

Nothing in the GPL forces them to give everyone the source code, nor does it mean they can't charge. Just that source must be accessible (accompany the binaries in most cases) to those who are allowed to use the software (can be limited to paying customers).

Linksys is just as bad, though. They wouldn't even release the GPL code for their routers until a backlash hit them. Even now what they release is not the same the firmware they distribute. I was working on a little mod to my WRT54G and leared that some of the files differ and some are outright not in the source distribution. Seattle Wireless (I think?) has more about the WRT54G if you are interested.

Thanks. I'm all over the web trying to read up on this right now.




KeyserSoze

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Schrodinger
As long as Sveasoft offers the source code modifications they've made to their firmware to paying customers (the source must accompany the binary) then its okay and adheres to the GPL.

Nothing in the GPL forces them to give everyone the source code, nor does it mean they can't charge. Just that source must be accessible (accompany the binaries in most cases) to those who are allowed to use the software (can be limited to paying customers).

Nothing wrong with that. Linksys did worse junk. They wouldn't even release the GPL code for their routers until a backlash hit them. Even now what they release is not the same the firmware they distribute. I was working on a little mod to my WRT54G and leared that some of the files differ and some are outright not in the source distribution. Seattle Wireless (I think?) has more about the WRT54G if you are interested.

It's possible that sveasoft is adding additional terms to the license though, which is directly forbidden by the GPL. If you redistribute the binary or the source (which is allowed under the GPL), your account with them or whatever is canceled.