Hacker News Reader

Comment by kierank | Hacker News Reader

Did you even read the article? He says "one fork is being sold with a comercial [sic] license". Commercial licence != GPL.

View on HN

I don't know the terms of the commercial licence in question. But GPL programs can be sold.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMone... Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money? (#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney) Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies is part of the definition of free software. Except in one special situation, there is no limit on what price you can charge. (The one exception is the required written offer to provide source code that must accompany binary-only release.)

Selling (or for that matter, distribution of any kind) GPL software under a different licence is not allowed. If you want to sell, you have to keep the GPL licence.

Given the general confusion in the post over what the GPL actually means, and what they thinks it means, It's not a given that the author doesn't just think that "Being Sold == Commercial Licence"

It's possible he means something like an EULA, but I can't seem to find any solid information on any of these three products (which have incredibly generic names) to check. It's not allowed to redistribute GPL software with added license requirements (as often found in an EULA), since you can't add restrictions on downstream users other than those already in the GPL.

Commercial license for what? Support?

Until there is more evidence this is just a developer who misunderstands what the license entitles others to do with his work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com