On Sat, 2011-01-29 at 16:40 -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
On 01/28/2011 09:11 AM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> AIUI, purporting to release a work under the GPL does not oblige the
> licensor to provide the source.
I disagree, especially given that the licensor is claiming to be the
sole copyright holder and they are distributing the work.
GPLv2 ties the right to copy/distribute the Program with the requirement
that the distributor either distribute it with the source code (3a) or a
written offer for how to get the source code (3b) (there is a 3c here,
but it is less relevant here).
So, distributing (aka, "releasing a work") under the GPL absolutely
obliges the licensor to provide the source to recipients of the Program
(usually the binary).
With all due respect, I don't think so... Assuming the licensor is the
sole copyright holder as they say, they have the exclusive right of
distribution under copyright law. They don't need a license to
distribute the work however they please. They are not infringing anyone
else's rights, so no one would have any cause to sue them.