[linux-elitists] GPL and binary distribution

Jay Sulzberger jays@panix.com
Mon Apr 16 14:47:46 PDT 2001

On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Greg KH wrote:

> In discussions today with a manager at place I work (no names here, but
> it's probably obvious...) the argument was raised (yet again) that once
> we compile a GPL program, we can limit the distribution of that binary
> version (and since we use a different version of the gcc compiler from
> everyone else, our binaries are unique from everyone else's.)
> Originally their argument was claiming that we could assert copyright on
> that binary version, but Steve Beattie (also on this list) made the very
> good point that a binary is a derived work, and hence you can't
> arbitrary claim copyright of it.
> So what I'm looking for is anything that either refutes the argument
> that we can limit the distribution of a binary version of a GPL program,
> or that supports it (I really am not looking for arguments to back up
> his point, but in fairness, and the fact that I'm afraid he's correct,
> I'll accept it :)
> thanks,
> greg k-h

GPL is a license for a copyrighted work.

If there are any doubts about what the license means then consult

1.  lawyers for the company which has doubts

2.  the copyright holder

3.  me.


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list