On Wednesday 20 September 2006 15:51, Ben Finney wrote: > Ottavio Campana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Scenario: a software house develops a web application based on GPL > > software. It doesn't sell the application to customers, it sells the > > access to the application, which is installed, run and is maintained > > on the software house's server. > > It's this situation (the "Application Service Provider loophole") that > the Affero GPL was intended to cover, and the current draft of the GPL > v3 now defines the term "propagate" that includes "making available to > the public". > > <URL:http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl-draft-2006-07-27.html>
While it is true that the GPLv3 is making the issue more clear, the impact remains the same. The share-a-like provisions of GPLv3 only kick in when one "conveys" the software, which the GPLv3 nicely defines as "any kind of propagation that enables other parties to make or receive copies." If all you're doing is selling access to a service (propagating) and in no way allow users to receive copies of the underlying code (conveying), the result is the same as under GPLv3. -Sean -- Sean Kellogg e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://blog.probonogeek.org/ So, let go ...Jump in ...Oh well, what you waiting for? ...it's all right ...'Cause there's beauty in the breakdown
