[Image description : 4 Panel comic. Panel 1: A Dora the explorer ripoff wearing a fedora and with the fedora logo on her t-shirt is smiling at the viewer. The caption “Fedora the explorer” is over her head. Panel 2: She speaks to a vaguely anthropomorphic chameleon: “Hello Opensuse !” He replies : “Hi Fedora!” Panel 3: OpenSuse Says: “Someone has been using your code while not freely providing theirs despite the GPL licence!” Panel 4: Fedora “Hmmm… Who could it be?” A fox wearing a red hat emerges from a bush in the background. End ]

  • fl42v@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Wasn’t it like they still provide their sources, but not binaries, which (while generally being a dick move) doesn’t doesn’t contradict the GPL?

    Or have I missed something?

    • BaumGeist@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      8 months ago

      Afaik the issue is that they made their code “open” source in the way many for-profit companies do: they require a subscription before you have access to the code.

      If I understand the GPL correctly that doesn’t violate it, since it only requires that the users have access to the source and not the general public.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      No. They closed their sources to subscribers, which in itself would be fine, but the terms of service contain a clause forbidding redistribution of the sources by subscribers, at the penalty of termination of the agreement.