[gnu-pl] wwwgnudiff - raport nr 85

[Wojciech Kotwica]

--- prev/licenses/gpl-faq.html  Sat Dec  7 05:12:21 2002
+++ curr/./licenses/gpl-faq.html        Wed Jun 11 05:12:04 2003
@@ -300,6 +300,18 @@
     available on the Internet?</A>
 
-    <li><A HREF="#InternalDistribution" NAME="TOCInternalDistribution">Is use 
within one
-    organization or company "distribution"?</A>
+    <LI><A HREF="#UnreleasedMods" NAME="TOCUnreleasedMods">  A company
+    is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site.
+    Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?</A>
+
+    <li><A HREF="#InternalDistribution" NAME="TOCInternalDistribution">
+    Is use within one organization or company "distribution"?</A>
+
+    <li><A HREF="#StolenCopy" NAME="TOCStolenCopy">
+    If someone steals a CD containing a version of a GPL-covered
+    program, does the GPL give him the right to redistribute that
+    version?</A>
+
+    <li><A HREF="#TradeSecretRelease" NAME="TOCTradeSecretRelease">
+    What if a company distributes a copy as a trade secret?</A>
 
     <li><A HREF="#GPLFairUse" NAME="TOCGPLFairUse">Do I have "fair use"
@@ -588,5 +600,5 @@
 But <em>if</em> you release the modified version to the public in some
 way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available
-to the users, under the GPL.
+to the program's users, under the GPL.
 <p>
 Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in
@@ -739,10 +751,11 @@
 <p>
 You can also release your changes to the client under the GPL, but
-agree not to release them to anyone else until the client says ok.  In
+agree not to release them to anyone else unless the client says ok.  In
 this case, too, no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA,
 or under any additional restrictions.
 <p>
-The GPL would give the client the right to redistribute your version,
-but in this scenario the client will choose not to exercise that right.
+The GPL would give the client the right to redistribute your version.
+In this scenario, the client will probably choose not to exercise that right,
+but does <em>have</em> the right.
 <p>
 
@@ -1733,4 +1746,29 @@
 <p>
 
+<dt><h4><A HREF="#TOCUnreleasedMods" NAME="UnreleasedMods">A company
+    is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site.
+    Does the GPL say they must release their modified
+    sources?</A></h4>
+
+<dd>
+The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without
+ever distributing it to others.  What this company is doing is a
+special case of that.  Therefore, the company does not have to release
+the modified sources.
+<p>
+It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications
+and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications.
+However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to
+talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require
+release of the source code in that special case.  We are thinking
+about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we don't have
+precise wording in mind yet.
+<p>
+In the mean time, you might want to use the <A
+HREF="http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html";>Affero GPL</A> for programs
+designed for network server use.
+<p>
+</dd>
+
 <dt><h4><A HREF="#TOCInternalDistribution"
     NAME="InternalDistribution">Is making and using multiple copies
@@ -1739,7 +1777,43 @@
 <dd>
 No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for
-itself.  When the organization transfers copies to other organizations
-or individuals, that is distribution.  In particular,
-distributing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution.
+itself.  As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop
+a modified version and install that version through its own
+facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that
+modified version to outsiders.
+<p>
+
+However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations
+or individuals, that is distribution.  In particular, providing copies
+to contractors for use off-site is distribution.
+<p>
+
+
+<dt><h4><A HREF="#TOCStolenCopy" NAME="StolenCopy"> If someone steals
+    a CD containing a version of a GPL-covered program, does the GPL
+    give him the right to redistribute that version?</A></h4>
+
+<dd>
+If the version has been released elsewhere, then the thief probably
+does have the right to make copies and redistribute them under the GPL,
+but if he is imprisoned for stealing the CD he may have to wait until
+his release before doing so.
+<p>
+If the version in question is unpublished and considered by a company
+to be its trade secret, then publishing it may be a violation of trade
+secret law, depending on other circumstances.  The GPL does not change
+that.  If the company tried to release its version and still treat it
+as a trade secret, that would violate the GPL, but if the company
+hasn't released this version, no such violation has occurred.
+<p>
+
+<dt><h4><A HREF="#TOCTradeSecretRelease"
+    NAME="TradeSecretRelease">What if a company distributes a copy as
+    a trade secret?</A></h4>
+<dd>
+If a company distributes a copy to you and claims it is a trade
+secret, the company has violated the GPL and will have to cease
+distribution.  Note how this differs from the theft case above; the
+company does not intentionally distribute a copy when a copy is
+stolen, so in that case the company has not violated the GPL.
 <p>
 
@@ -2112,5 +2186,5 @@
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2002/12/06 20:24:22 $ $Author: novalis $
+$Date: 2003/06/10 12:16:17 $ $Author: rms $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 <HR>