Is this really unclear? If you didn't distribute source code with the
binary, you need to make sure that it's kept available for three years
after the last time you distributed a binary copy, or the last time that
any of your business relationships such as dealers and distributors did. I
mention the dealers and distributors because the three-year obligation is
theirs as well, but they generally have no idea how to fulfill it.
Fulfilling the source code responsibility for them is better than having
them (and you) get sued, and then having them sue you.
Because this is license-discuss, and I'm not here to market my services, I
will speak with your attorney _for_free_ if they need some clarity.
Thanks
Bruce
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:02 AM, David Woolley <for...@david-woolley.me.uk>
wrote:
> On 02/08/18 08:09, Thorbjørn Vynne wrote:
>
> For an end-of-life commercial product that are using GPL based software,
>> can any one clarify if its a requirement to keep having making the source
>> available even though no more products are shipped or serviced.
>>
>
> Please explain what is not clear in the wording of the GPL. In any case,
> if it is unclear, only your own lawyer can give you an opinion on which you
> can safely rely.
>
> Also note that the GPL strongly hints that any commercial distributor
> should supply the source at the time they supply the binary; otherwise they
> enter into a commitment to supply the source to non-customers.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
> _lists.opensource.org
>
--
Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering
Standards committee chair, license committee member, co-founder, Open
Source Initiative
President, Open Research Institute
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
