Hacker News Reader

Comment by i_am_jl | Hacker News Reader

Do they?

Is Lego not compliant until someone asks for the source code and they refuse?

No, the license has multiple requirements before that, including giving users a copy of the license and a written offer for source code.

Lego is only compliant if they follow the conditions of the license. The first condition include this:

"... and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.".

Do Lego do this? What I can find is this page which does not include a copy of the GPL or a link to it: https://studiohelp.bricklink.com/hc/en-us/articles/660631342...

That is an interesting point. How many GPL licensed projects don't follow this themselves?

It might be different for the originator to not include the license and just state it on their website, but any fork or redistributor would need to provide a copy of the license to be in compliance.

IMHO the best way to ensure compliance is to include full source and the license file with every download.

IMHO2 this might be why Apple doesn't want GPL in their app store. One could claim Apple is redistributing it and not in full compliance depending how the developer handles these things.

>Do Lego do this?

Yep. It's in the install directory under /Licenses/Licenses.docx, Appendix B, provided with the Program as required.

Could you expand on that comment. Do they include attribution to the authors (as they have in blenders license) and all notices that refer to the license?

In general, in order to be in compliance they also need to:

    You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
    whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
    part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
    parties under the terms of this License.

And either accompany source code along with executable, or a written offer for source code.

Including a copy of the GPL is a nice first step. Do they follow the remaining conditions?

It's not much of a stretch to say that the copy of the GPL they distributed with the app implicitly includes an offer for the source code. So yes?

>Could you expand on that comment. Do they include attribution to the authors (as they have in blenders license) and all notices that refer to the license?

I don't know.

I'm not entirely sure which libraries licenses are alleged to have been infringed upon. The string "blen" doesn't appear in the Licenses.docx file. There are another ~10 license text files in that folder for libraries that might be Blender-flavored.

>...source code along with executable, or a written offer for source code... Do they follow the remaining conditions?

Again, I can't say, I'm not sure how to search for it without getting false positives and I'm not committed enough to read through that much licensing text.

I agree with my sibling commenter on his assertion that including the license (that mandates furnishing source code on request) is itself an offer to furnish source code on request, but I understand where you're coming from if you don't.

Interesting side note, in the Licenses.docx file there's also a copy of the GNU Affero GPL3 license. I've no idea what they've included that uses that license, but I think the possibility that they've included AGPL3 licensed code could be much messier.

Just downloaded their provided installers for both mac and win, then emailed their customer support ('customersupport@bricklink.com') to enquire about it's license, open source status, and if there's somewhere to download the source code.

Received the automated "we got your message, we'll get to you when we can" style message.

Lets see what they say. :)

Initial response received today:

    Good Afternoon Justin,

    Thanks for reaching out to BrickLink, I would be happy to take a look into
    this for you!

    I, myself, do not have the knowledge base to answer this. This has been
    reported to my team and I will reach back out once I am presented with an
    answer for you.

    Thank you for your patience.

    Sincerely,
    Toby
    BrickLink Customer Support

So, more waiting...

They also have to provide the GPL license file with their software, which most GPL violators choose not to do.

I can't check the software at the moment but if they provide the license file(s) and offer a way to get the source then there's nothing wrong, really.

> I can't check the software at the moment but if they provide the license file(s) and offer a way to get the source then there's nothing wrong, really.

Notably, it would either need to be a written offer according to GPL2[0],

> b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

…and GPL3[1],

> b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.

…or, if the distribution medium is not physical, the source code would have to be provided in the same way as the original object code / binary:

> d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

So, for instance, one would expect a "download source" link on https://www.bricklink.com/v3/studio/download.page but I don't see one.

[0]: https://download.blender.org/release/GPL-license.txt

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html

Blender is licensed under GPL 2-or-later

https://www.blender.org/about/license/

https://download.blender.org/release/GPL-license.txt

According to that license:

      1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
    source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
    conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
    copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
    notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
    and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
    along with the Program.

    [...]

      3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
    under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
    Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

        a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
        source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
        1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

        b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
        years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
        cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
        machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
        distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
        customarily used for software interchange; or,

        c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
        to distribute corresponding source code.  (This alternative is
        allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
        received the program in object code or executable form with such
        an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

If the GPL license notices are not kept intact, if a copy of the GPL is not provided with the software, and if the source code - or an offer of the source code - is not provided with the software, then they are not currently compliant with the terms of the GPL.

They could be in violation on any distribution if they do not include the required notices of relevant licenses and the end-user's rights.

On the BrickLink Studio-Site they mention the License for ffmpeg and have a download-link for it. So I assume they are generally cool with these things.

Or, the ffmpeg folks detected and got in touch, so it was corrected. Blender folks might have to do the same.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com