Who owns the copyright of on the code? If the company owns the copyright then
the employee is simply an "extension" or part of the copyright owner.
Therefore the applicaiton binary had not transferred to another entity so the
source code does not have to be opened, in that case.
It is when the application binary is transferred (given or sold) to another
entity (person or company) that the opening of the code must occur.
This is my understanding of the GPL and IANAL. YMMV.
Alan
On Thursday 04 July 2002 01:50 pm, Robert Bushman wrote:
> If they give the apps to employees within their
> organization, don't they have to give those
> employees Free access to the source code?
> So you could have a policy saying, "don't
> take the source code", or "don't redistribute
> the source code", but wouldn't that be a
> violation of the GPL?
>
> I reached this interpretation when looking at a
> Java graphing library that was GPL. My job is
> working on a thick-client CRM app. It's entirely
> internal to the organization, but my impression
> was that the employees would still have to have
> Free (including redistribution privs) access
> to the source code if I linked the library.
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)