GPL Binary Source Obligations

Discussions focus on the requirements under GPL and similar open source licenses to provide source code when distributing binaries, debating if public release is needed or if supplying it only to direct recipients upon request complies.

📉 Falling 0.4x Open Source
3,562
Comments
20
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#2722
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2007
9
2008
18
2009
51
2010
57
2011
144
2012
112
2013
160
2014
145
2015
192
2016
256
2017
196
2018
159
2019
184
2020
223
2021
318
2022
239
2023
468
2024
323
2025
291
2026
17

Keywords

MS AFAIK EULA GH BSD IMO FSF GPL AWS openwrt.org source source code binaries code license distribute publish source available release open source

Sample Comments

yarrel Nov 24, 2016 View on HN

No. They're distributing the binaries, so they have to provide the source code to users of the binaries on request. Publishing it like this satisfies that requirement.

TheCoelacanth Nov 5, 2021 View on HN

You are only required to provide the source to your users, not to the original developers.

grahamlee Oct 11, 2021 View on HN

Because you have to make the source code available to people who receive your distribution of the library.

tonyonodi Aug 17, 2022 View on HN

Thanks for clearing that up, I'm not distributing the source code so I think I'm good.

pmorici Sep 17, 2008 View on HN

isn't the distributor of open source software only required to give a copy to the source to those people which they sold the software too. since Bank of America is the only purchaser if they are the only ones who get the source and if they don't want to share that is their business...

ipaddr Jun 26, 2022 View on HN

No because you only need to make the source available on request from the original developer(s).

c0nsumer Mar 27, 2015 View on HN

It's only required that the source be given to those who get the binaries. Since that's not "we" it won't work.

akvadrako Nov 27, 2019 View on HN

It’s a BSD license, so they don’t need to release the source.

AF Aug 14, 2007 View on HN

I don't see a problem with it. They are still providing the source. What is the issue? IMO, it isn't any less in the 'spirit of open source' to do something like this.

im3w1l Feb 18, 2021 View on HN

It is available both for download and in cloud. So they would have to pull the download if they dont want to release source.