Comments on: So you want to comply with the GPL...

The Software Freedom Law Center wants to make it easier to comply with the GPL, and has developed a new online guide to working with GPL software like Linux.

[sm5574]

Wow! Since non-GPL IT departments only constitute 0.001% of the industry, I must have managed to work for nearly all of them, as I have never used GPL software professionally.

I take it that was hyperbole rather than extremely wishful thinking.

[Matt Asay]

I guarantee that you're using Linux or other GPL-licensed software somewhere in your company. If you're with an SMB, it's possible that you're not (though of course you're using it whenever you use Google, etc.), but every large enterprise has GPL software in spades.

[jrepenning]

The article seems pretty glib in assuming that most "proprietary + OSS" distributions are non-"combining," yet drawing that line has always been the chief point of confusion and concern.

[sm5574]

True, it is utilized in components we may use, such as firewalls or whatever. But we never touch the code, so in a very real sense we are not using the software, and the GPL is of no real interest...unless you're saying that everyone who uses FireFox needs to completely understand the GPL. And even that would be more apropos than the professional use I've experienced.

I agree that a company should be familiar with the GPL before downloading any open source CODE, but if you acquire it already compiled -- and especially installed or embedded -- I really don't see the point.

[odubtaig]

No, in a very real sense you are using that software. The GPL just doesn't apply unless you're modifying or distributing the software (and distributing does include burning a copy for your mate).

So no, the GPL doesn't directly apply in this case but just because you're not using it directly doesn't mean you're not using it at all.