-3

Lets say you have a library that licenses with GPL v3. You have two pieces of code, one of them is your "loader" and the other is your real "code".

So your "loader" makes a request to a server, and the server gives it a string of the real "code". The "loader" then runs the real "code". You are never given a binary version of the real "code", but you are given both binary and source code of the "loader".

From a technical/legal standpoint, is it legal to not release the source code of the real "code" since you aren't given a binary version of it and it is being dynamically loaded later on by the "loader" (which you have full source to).

Thanks.

Rob Gates
  • 109

2 Answers2

3

This is silly. Your question basically amounts to: "How can I distribute a copyrighted work to someone, but to do so in a way that I can convince myself that I'm not distributing it, by calling it something else".

If you want to "distribute", "convey", or "load" or whatever term you choose, a copyrighted software in such a way that your software uses it, then you need to abide by the terms set forth by the author of the copyrighted software. In this case, that means your software must be GPLv3 licensed.

Saying you're not distributing the library because they don't get "a binary" is like a guy selling bootleg CDs saying he's not selling CDs because they don't have a jewel case.

whatsisname
  • 27,703
0

If your loader is linked with a GPLv3 library, this means your loader is GPL'd code. A GPL'd code cannot use GPL-incompatible code.

However, in your case the question is a bit tricky because in theory the server could offer GPL-compatible code. Or it could offer GPL-incompatible code.

Software licenses in general cannot restrict use, as it is a right given to you by the copyright law. Redistribution is not by default permitted by the copyright law.

So, if you don't have some SHA1 sum enforcement in the loader that would make it possible to use only non-GPL'd code, I would assume that you can distribute the loader. It is not a derivative work of GPL-incompatible code then.

However, if the offered code is a derivative work of GPL'd code (such as using GPLv3 library in such a manner that it is clearly a derivative work), you cannot redistribute the code using the server. So what I said about this scheme being permitted applies only to the case where the offered code is not a derivative work of GPL'd code.

juhist
  • 2,579
  • 12
  • 14