Open source doubt

[lifer1]

I have a piece of open source software that came with GPL3 license.

In due course, the original author has discontinued this piece and has converted this into a new suite (proprietory piece of software) for commercial purpose.

What are the implications for those who have old copies of open source software in terms of usage, distribution? Can the author or the company that the author is part of that sells this commercial suite interfere in the rights of those who have old piece of software under open license?

Can the old piece of software be distributed with or without changes, freely or commercially without their interference?

[Garbage]

You might want to fork the previous open source code and continue using it.

If original developer want to close source his work, then he is free to do so from next version / release, but IMO, he can't restrict anybody from using previous code which was open sourced.

[nims11]

The version of the work released as open source cannot be close sourced. That is what is one of GPL's point - to ensure that the freedom is preserved. So you can use that version with freedom which all open source softwares provide.

But i have a doubt here, you said that the original author has discontinued this piece and has converted this into a new suite (proprietory piece of software) for commercial purpose.
Doesn't this void the GPL3's term of

You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force.

SHouldn't they be applied on the author too as he is using the previous open source code in a proprietary suite?
?

[Liverpool_fan]

No way the author can take away the code and keep it proprietary without violating the GPL. Unless he had license the software in a dual license before.

[lifer1]

Hi Liverpool_fan, nims11, Garbage

Thank you for your replies.

I understand that those who have previous copies have freedom to continue to use them from your clarification.

The original author has pulled down most of the free copies located in different servers and also has withdrawn the source code since then. These days those servers only carry much stripped down demo version of the commercial suite for free.

Unfortunately i do not have the source code and I don't know how i can fork this in the absence of code or even make some changes in the software to make it suit my needs. I'll have to wait till someone forks this, or to find somebody with the source code, I guess.

On an aside, the random questions to post replies are difficult.

[Krow]

On an aside, the random questions to post replies are difficult.

Lol, they are to keep spammers at bay. Spammers can be difficult too.

[ico]

Originally Posted by lifer1

On an aside, the random questions to post replies are difficult.

Random questions and advertisements disabled for you.

[Garbage]

[offtopic]

Originally Posted by ico

Random questions and advertisements disabled for you.

I wish I had some superpower!
[/offtopic]

[lifer1]

Hi People

Is there a common pool or repository where source codes of older free source softwares are kept? or is there a grand meeting place of open software users where somebody can post requests for source codes of softwares that came with GPL license?

I have tried requesting the original author. He says that he's done with open source and he's on commercial path/closed source now and he's got no legal or moral obligation to make the source code public. I'd have been better off if i had backed up a copy of source code when it's public. One will never know when a piece of software will cease to be open source I'm not sure if someone's got source code of this or if some one is forking on this.

Thanks ico for disabling random questions. Helpful This is the first time i'm seeing this gesture of responding to a user's difficulty with extra processes while posting online. Much appreciated.

[ico]

hi,

can you tell me which software are you talking about??

[lifer1]

Hi Ico

Though the doubt was in general, the piece of software i was talking about was OpenRep, a medical software.

[Liverpool_fan]

Clear GPL violation here.

Originally Posted by lifer1

I have tried requesting the original author. He says that he's done with open source and he's on commercial path/closed source now and he's got no legal or moral obligation to make the source code public.

If the code of his proprietary software is a derivative of the GPL code, then he is under total obligation to release the full source code. Does he admit the proprietary code is the derivative of the GPL code?

One will never know when a piece of software will cease to be open source I'm not sure if someone's got source code of this or if some one is forking on this.

But that's illegal as well. GPL license unlike BSDL prohibits this explicitely. Once a code has been licensed to GPL, any derivative has to be GPL or a compatible license.
You just cannot license your code under GPL, get community patches, and work from volunteers and then closed source it.
Obviously if it was dual licensed, then he can use the non-GPL license

Though the author of the software can claim he has rewritten the software from scratch (and hence not GPL applicable) and since he doesn't distribute the GPL licensed software any more, he isn't obliged to distribute the source code.

I suggest report it here.
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html

And yeah, there is no grand pool of software source code. Open source projects may be hosted at Github, Sourceforge, Google Code, etc. where you can collaborate or fork the project.

[lifer1]

Does he admit the proprietary code is the derivative of the GPL code?

He is very brief about the earlier open source software and just maintains that it's over, and he's only associated with the closed source one that his company is distributing now and he says that his attorneys also back him.

I think there might be some similarity between the source codes of two products.

I suggest report it here.
GPL Violations homepage - gpl-violations.org FAQ

I did write to them but yet to hear back from them.

Thanks for providing the host servers for open source projects. I think i might have found a fork of this software on github though in a different language ,

[lifer1]

Hi Liverpool_fan

I did hear back from gpl-violations.org. They opine that GPL is basically a distribution license and can be enforced by copyright license holder alone, if there's a violation in distribution by other distributors(non license holders). So license holders won't take action against their own selves even if they are at fault for example in case of not fulfilling the written offer for code.

Any how I got some great suggestions here and i thank everyone who took time to help me.

[Liverpool_fan]

OK thanks for getting back and posting this piece of info.