HN Explorer

Ask HN: Is it legal to charge for GPL source code?

8 points by funnyfacts365 ↗ HN
I was reading the user manual of a device I got and they offer the source code of GPL software they use, but charge a fee.

The following is what's written on the user manual of the device:

"GPL Declarations The device contains – in part – some free software (software licensed in a way that ensures your freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software). This free software is also contained in the firmware update files that are distributed together with the software installation packages. The free software contained within the firmware includes a version of X-LOADER, U-BOOT, LINUX, LIBSYSFS, LIBUCI, LIBUSBIP, ETHTOOL, UCLIBC, QT and BUSYBOX.

Further, for at least three (3) years from the date of distribution of the applicable product or software, we will give to anyone who contacts us at gplcoderequest@<redacted>.com, for a charge of no more than our cost of physically performing source code distribution, a machine-readable copy of the complete corresponding source code for the version of the software that we distributed to you."

So, is that legal?

7 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 25.6 ms ] thread
mindcrime
In general, yes, you can charge for GPL'd code.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html

That said, I'm not 100% sure about the scenario where you distribute the binaries without the source, and invoke the "written offer" clause. It's not totally clear to me if you're allowed to charge in that specific circumstance or not.

Edit: OK, at least for the GPLv2, the answer is "yes":

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html

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,

funnyfacts365
I see it now! Thanks!

Taken from the link above:

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?

No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.

walterbell
There are VC-backed companies distributing binaries based on GPL code, which discourage their customers from releasing (or even asking for) source. E.g. the vendor won't sell to anyone unless the order size is six figures or greater. This reduces the chance that the customer cares about either source or the GPL. Even if the customer cares about the source, they may not want to offend the vendor, e.g. lose early access to new features.
vog
> E.g. the vendor won't sell [the source] to anyone unless the order size is six figures or greater

Note that this is illegal in GPL v2. It contains a clause to prevent exactly that kind of malicious behaviour:

> ... for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code ...

However, GPL v3 explicitly allows for that practice:

> You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.

walterbell
Sadly they are charging for binaries and most customers are unaware there is GPL source associated with the binaries.
db48x
If the customer is inattentive enough that they don't notice the licence, that's their own fault.
db48x
I really like that they spell out what free software they use; that's a good sign.