GPL FAQ

Iseng2 saya baca GPL FAQ dan inilah beberapa isi yang menarik yang terkait dg masalah distribusi ulang dan penggunaan bersama aplikasi tidak bebas.

Maaf kalau tulisan ini lumayan panjang tapi isinya hanya copy-paste =P

Oh iya, penebalan tulisan dan pemberian garis bawah dilakukan oleh saya.

Kalau boleh ngasih kesimpulan sendiri (eh tapi saya bukan pengacara loh), semuanya berawal dari kegiatan distribusi. Kombinasi erat aplikasi kita dengan aplikasi lain yang dirilis dg GPL memang mengharuskan kita merilis aplikasi kita di bawah GPL. Namun kita berhak untuk tidak mendistribusikan aplikasi kita ke orang lain sehingga orang lain tidak berhak untuk meminta source code aplikasi kita (ya, walaupun itu GPL). Mohon dikoreksi kalau kesimpulan ini salah..

***

Tentang redistribusi

If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy?

No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so. He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses.

Tentang penjualan

Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?

Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies is part of the definition of free software. Except in one special situation, there is no limit on what price you can charge. (The one exception is the required written offer to provide source code that must accompany binary-only release.)

Non-Disclosure Agreement – Jika didistribusikan

Does the GPL allow me to distribute copies under a nondisclosure agreement?

No. The GPL says that anyone who receives a copy from you has the right to redistribute copies, modified or not. You are not allowed to distribute the work on any more restrictive basis.

Non-Disclosure Agreement – Jika tidak/belum didistribusikan

Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement?

Yes. For instance, you can accept a contract to develop changes and agree not to release your changes until the client says ok. This is permitted because in this case no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA.

You can also release your changes to the client under the GPL, but 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.

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 have the right.

Kombinasi

What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”?

An “aggregate” consists of a number of separate programs, distributed together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL permits you to create and distribute an aggregate, even when the licenses of the other software are non-free or GPL-incompatible. The only condition is that you cannot release the aggregate under a license that prohibits users from exercising rights that each program’s individual license would grant them.

Where’s the line between two separate programs, and one program with two parts? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).

If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.

By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.

Kombinasi (lanjutan)

I’d like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?

You cannot incorporate GPL-covered software in a proprietary system. The goal of the GPL is to grant everyone the freedom to copy, redistribute, understand, and modify a program. If you could incorporate GPL-covered software into a non-free system, it would have the effect of making the GPL-covered software non-free too.

A system incorporating a GPL-covered program is an extended version of that program. The GPL says that any extended version of the program must be released under the GPL if it is released at all. This is for two reasons: to make sure that users who get the software get the freedom they should have, and to encourage people to give back improvements that they make.

However, in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and non-free programs communicate at arms length, that they are not combined in a way that would make them effectively a single program.

The difference between this and “incorporating” the GPL-covered software is partly a matter of substance and partly form. The substantive part is this: if the two programs are combined so that they become effectively two parts of one program, then you can’t treat them as two separate programs. So the GPL has to cover the whole thing.

If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two separate programs—but you have to do it properly. The issue is simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing. Why do we care about this? Because we want to make sure the users clearly understand the free status of the GPL-covered software in the collection.

If people were to distribute GPL-covered software calling it “part of” a system that users know is partly proprietary, users might be uncertain of their rights regarding the GPL-covered software. But if they know that what they have received is a free program plus another program, side by side, their rights will be clear.

Akses via jaringan

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?

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.

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. Developers who wish to address this might want to use the GNU Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use.

Penggunaan dalam organisasi

Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company “distribution”?

No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for 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.

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.

Kalau cuma make

If I only make copies of a GPL-covered program and run them, without distributing or conveying them to others, what does the license require of me?

Nothing. The GPL does not place any conditions on this activity.

Awesome edition

Baru aja ngebaca sebuah artikel di Coding Horror. Biasanya cuma ngeliat judulnya soale.. dan ternyata ada kalimat menarik tertulis di sana.

Open source software only comes in one edition: awesome.

Jadi ceritanya artikel tsb ngomongin ttg segmentasi pasar yg dilakukan oleh vendor software maupun sebuah layanan di internet. Segmentasi ini lalu berpengaruh terhadap ongkos yang harus dikeluarkan oleh customer. Muncul juga anggapan bahwa segmentasi dilakukan tuk membedakan mana customer kaya dan mana customer miskin, karena ujung2nya juga ke harga.. hehehe..

Oh ya, lanjutan kalimat di atas adalah paragraf berikut ini.

The money is irrelevant; the expensive resource here is my brain. If I choose open source, I don’t have to think about licensing, feature matrices, or recurring billing. I know, I know, we don’t use software that costs money here, but I’d almost be willing to pay for the privilege of not having to think about that stuff ever again.

Ya, open source software sebagian besar (atau semua?) tidak mengutip biaya terhadap lisensi. Walau hal ini tidak berarti setiap pengguna solusi open source pasti tidak akan mengeluarkan uang sepeserpun. Distribusi, dukungan setelah penjualan, dan lain-lain masih bisa berarti harus mengeluarkan uang. Pak Rusmanto dari InfoLinux baru-baru ini juga mencontohkan sebuah skema biaya yang diperlukan untuk mendapatkan dan menggunakan sebuah produk open source, yaitu BlankOn. Silakan lihat langsung di arsip milis BlankOn.

Oh ya, sebagai penutup, coba lihat video berikut =))

Legal itu ..

.. bukan cuma berarti beli dari vendor.

Tapi juga mengikuti ketentuan yang berlaku.

Contoh: beli Mac OS X dari Apple. Oh jelas boleh sah. Legal? blom relevan tuk dibicarakan kalau cuma sampe sini saja.

Sistem operasi tsb lalu dipasang di komputer. Pertanyaan berikutnya, komputer apa? keluaran Apple? kalo tidak, weitss.. jangan asal mengklaim sistem operasi itu legal.

Dari

> **2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.**

> A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time.

Bagaimana dengan komputer “biasa” yang menjalankan Mac OS X alias Macintosh clone? Kalau baca di [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_clone#Macintosh_cloning_today), praktik seperti ini memang tidak diperbolehkan/diizikan oleh Apple.

Contoh lain: Database Oracle.

Pada tahu kan kalau perangkat lunak ini bisa didownload secara bebas? Coba cek .

Walau bebas didownload, bukan berarti bisa digunakan secara bebas. Coba cek tulisan yg tertulis di sana

> All software downloads are free, and each comes with a Development License that allows you to use full versions of the products at no charge while developing and prototyping your applications (or for strictly self-educational purposes). In some cases, certain downloads (such as Beta releases) have licenses with slightly different terms.

Yang saya tangkap adalah produk Oracle hasil download tersebut hanya datang dengan lisensi pengembangan yang hanya mengizinkan penggunaan dalam tahap pengembangan juga. Ingin menggunakan tuk keperluan produksi? silakan beli lisensi yang sesuai.

Tolong koreksi kalau saya salah.