generic query regarding GPL and licensing terms associated with gdb

Robert Dewar dewar@adacore.com
Fri Aug 13 16:18:00 GMT 2010


Martin, what you are saying is seriously wrong!

The GPL never automatically forces disclosure of anything.

If you take GPL code, modify it by adding trade secrets,
and then distribute it without giving a GPL license, it
is not the case that somehow you have lost the trade
secrets, or that anyone is free to disclose them. That
is not at all the case.

Yes, it is true that if you grant a GPL license to someone
for the distrtibuted object, then of course there are no ytrade
secrets.

But NO ONE EVER forces you to issue a GPL license.

You most certainly can redistribute without granting
such a license (and if there are trade secrets present,
then indeed you cannot grant a valid GPL license anyway).

Now if you *DO* redistribute in this manner, you have likely
committed a copyright violation, actionable in the usual way.

In response to such a claim of copyright violation, you can
AT YOUR DISCRETION, cure the infringement in the future by
granting a GPL license, but no one forces you to do so,

The GPL NEVER forces you to disclose anything, it simply
says that if you meet certain disclosure and distribution
requirements then you have a license to redistribute, that's
all!



More information about the Gdb mailing list