PDA

View Full Version : Can I Sell GPL Cd's?



Johnsie
June 19th, 2006, 11:19 AM
Would that be legal? I'm too lazy to read up on it and probably wouldn't understand all the legal jargon.

rbalfour
June 19th, 2006, 11:21 AM
You can sell CDs with Distros on it, but leagally you are just selling CDs and not the GPL software.

tsb
June 19th, 2006, 11:54 AM
You need to include the source, correct?

Gustav
June 19th, 2006, 11:57 AM
You just have to make sure the sources are availible.

It's enough that you give the source to any buyer that asks for it.

Kvark
June 19th, 2006, 12:04 PM
Check if you are allowed to use the involved trademarks. For example RedHat doesn't allow others to use their trademarks so if you want to sell RedHat CDs you'd have to rebrand them first or use CentOS which is a rebranded RedHat.

Lux Perpetua
June 19th, 2006, 12:14 PM
Would that be legal? I'm too lazy to read up on it and probably wouldn't understand all the legal jargon.Yes, you can sell GPL software; it's in the text of the license. (Just read the license; you will understand it.) However, you cannot prevent the people you sell it to from selling it themselves or from giving it away for free, and you must make the source code available to them if they ask for it (as noted).

BWF89
June 19th, 2006, 01:32 PM
Read this, its about The GIMP and what you can do with it under the GPL, any program thats licenced under the GPL is bound by the same restrictions:

http://gimp.org/about/selling.html

rbalfour
June 19th, 2006, 04:28 PM
You only have to make the source available, if you are making a new distro.
BEFORE the person buys it, you have to clearly state if the source is included or not and ALSO give the option to have it included or not.

prime example: http://www.osdisc.com/cgi-bin/view.cgi/index.html?ad=distrowatch

slyfella
December 18th, 2008, 08:16 AM
According to the GNU GPL v2.0 that Ubuntu is supposedly licensed under, we are allowed to sell the CDs and charge a fee for the service.

Section 1 of the GNU GPL v2.0


1. "You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Library's complete source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and distribute a copy of this License along with the Library.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."

However, take a look further at what the Ubuntu Trademark policy states (http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy) and you will soon find that Ubuntu does not allow you, the end user, to put any commercial intent behind the Ubuntu product. (It appears Canonical Ltd. wants to retain complete control over who can modify and redistribute Ubuntu).



"Restricted use that requires a trademark license

Permission from us is necessary to use any of the Trademarks under any circumstances other than those specifically permitted above. These include:

* Any commercial use

* Use on or in relation to a software product that includes or is built on top of a product supplied by us, if there is any commercial intent associated with that product.

* Use in a domain name or URL.

* Use for merchandising purposes, e.g. on t-shirts and the like.

* Use of a name which includes the letters BUNTU in relation to computer hardware or software.

* Services relating to any of the above."


This Trademark page pretty much states that Canonical Ltd. does not want you to even have the right to talk about Ubuntu on a commercial site.

Open Source is suppose to mean free to use, modify and redistribute. With the recipient having the same rights you were given under the GPL license. If any additional restrictions are placed on the software, you lose your rights to use the source.

Section 4 and 6 of the GNU GPL v2.0:


4. "You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance."


6. "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. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License."

It appears to me that Canonical Ltd. is not conforming to the GNU GPL that this software was released under by placing restrictions (some of which violate freedom of speech) on modification and distribution of the Free software. Moreover, the GNU GPL license is not even available with the product until it is up and running. The License must be available before running the software in order for it to be accepted.

The irony is that, even with Microsoft Windows, anyone can freely talk about the product on a commercial website, use the name within a url, provide services related to the product (installation services, programs or applications etc)as long as they do not claim to be Microsoft or claim to own the Windows mark. :confused:

fatality_uk
December 18th, 2008, 09:38 AM
According to the GNU GPL v2.0 that Ubuntu is supposedly licensed under, we are allowed to sell the CDs and charge a fee for the service.

Section 1 of the GNU GPL v2.0


1. "You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Library's complete source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and distribute a copy of this License along with the Library.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."

However, take a look further at what the Ubuntu Trademark policy states (http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy) and you will soon find that Ubuntu does not allow you, the end user, to put any commercial intent behind the Ubuntu product. (It appears Canonical Ltd. wants to retain complete control over who can modify and redistribute Ubuntu).



"Restricted use that requires a trademark license

Permission from us is necessary to use any of the Trademarks under any circumstances other than those specifically permitted above. These include:

* Any commercial use

* Use on or in relation to a software product that includes or is built on top of a product supplied by us, if there is any commercial intent associated with that product.

* Use in a domain name or URL.

* Use for merchandising purposes, e.g. on t-shirts and the like.

* Use of a name which includes the letters BUNTU in relation to computer hardware or software.

* Services relating to any of the above."


This Trademark page pretty much states that Canonical Ltd. does not want you to even have the right to talk about Ubuntu on a commercial site.

Open Source is suppose to mean free to use, modify and redistribute. With the recipient having the same rights you were given under the GPL license. If any additional restrictions are placed on the software, you lose your rights to use the source.

Section 4 and 6 of the GNU GPL v2.0:


4. "You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance."


6. "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. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License."

It appears to me that Canonical Ltd. is not conforming to the GNU GPL that this software was released under by placing restrictions (some of which violate freedom of speech) on modification and distribution of the Free software. Moreover, the GNU GPL license is not even available with the product until it is up and running. The License must be available before running the software in order for it to be accepted.

The irony is that, even with Microsoft Windows, anyone can freely talk about the product on a commercial website, use the name within a url, provide services related to the product (installation services, programs or applications etc)as long as they do not claim to be Microsoft or claim to own the Windows mark. :confused:

Go on, i'll bite! :D

Your WRONG, WRONG, WRONG and WRONG.

I hope that clears up the situation for you. If you care to research your posts a little more before baiting, at least it would provide more of a challenge :) ):P

slyfella
December 18th, 2008, 02:51 PM
Go on, i'll bite! :D

Your WRONG, WRONG, WRONG and WRONG.

I hope that clears up the situation for you. If you care to research your posts a little more before baiting, at least it would provide more of a challenge :) ):P

And that statement clarifies nothing!

billgoldberg
December 18th, 2008, 03:03 PM
Would that be legal? I'm too lazy to read up on it and probably wouldn't understand all the legal jargon.

Yes.

And you can ask any price you want for it.

halovivek
December 18th, 2008, 03:07 PM
yes you can sell CD's with source code(mostly likely users ask)

forrestcupp
December 18th, 2008, 05:01 PM
You can sell CDs with Distros on it, but leagally you are just selling CDs and not the GPL software.

Actually, you can sell the GPL software itself to anyone ignorant enough to buy it without breaking any rules. Like everyone else said, you do have to make the source code available. It doesn't have to be on the CD, but it does have to be available for download. You could just provide the links to the original downloads and be safe.

Also, you can't change the license, which means that you can't prevent anyone else for distributing it for free. That's why someone would either have to be ignorant or among the first people to receive the software to pay for it.

But if you're just being helpful and you want the price of the CD back, it may be worth it for some people to pay a buck for a CD instead of having to download huge files.

Eisenwinter
December 18th, 2008, 07:14 PM
Go on, i'll bite! :D

Your WRONG, WRONG, WRONG and WRONG.

I hope that clears up the situation for you. If you care to research your posts a little more before baiting, at least it would provide more of a challenge :) ):P
You're. ;)