Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Nicolas Neuss <lastname@kit.edu> writes:

> Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavallaro@pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com>
> writes:
>
>> Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization
>> to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the
>> source code for any released product that included your library. As a
>> result, most people working on commercial published software, or who
>> contemplate doing so in the future, simply avoid gpl libraries
>> altogether.
>
> Here is a question which I find rather interesting: Is in-house use of
> GPLed software allowed?  It is quite clear that using GPLed software by
> a single developer to run a commercial web server for example is
> allowed.  But in the case of multiple developers inside a company one
> could either argue that the company operates as an entity, or
> alternatively that the company by letting one of their developers
> combine GPLed software with their own product is forced to give her/him
> the whole software under GPL.

In-house use would be outside of the scope of the GPL, since no
"distribution" would occur.

A more interesting question would be what happens with respect to
holdings, and the daughter companies.  In this case, I would argue
distribution occurs (invoicing would have to occur legally AFAIK), and
therefore GPL would apply.  Which doesn't mean that YOU would get access
to the code of course, only that the daughter company who buys it from
another daughter company would get it (and be able to hire YOU instead
of the sister company if them need a patch and the sister is unable or
unwilling to provide it).


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__