in reply to Commercial Security versus Open Source Ideals

Tricky.

If they haven't paid for the code, and it includes no GPL'd modules, and it is not mentioned in any contract then I don't think you have to disclose.

Ethically: should you? Your company privately developed this code at it's own expense, as I see it you have every ethical reason to refuse to release this.

I see nothing wrong with people making money out of Perl - I'm all in favour of it. While all the free contributions to Perl have helped me immensely, I'd be very reluctant to release commerically sensitive code without a lot of thought.

I don't see this as parasitism, I will contribute what I can to the community, but I will not feel obliged to do so other than through my own free choice.

My 2p, hope this helps.

"The future will be better tomorrow." ... from the collected wisdom of George W Bush.

  • Comment on Re: Commercial Security versus Open Source Ideals

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Commercial Security versus Open Source Ideals
by IDStewart (Acolyte) on Jul 31, 2001 at 22:50 UTC
    If they haven't paid for the code, and it includes no GPL'd modules, and it is not mentioned in any contract then I don't think you have to disclose.

    I don't think there is any requirement for disclosure, even if the code does use GPL'ed modules. The GPL requires that if you distribute software, and that software is a derivative of GPL'ed software or the software links against a GPL'ed library, then the source for the software must be made available.

    The GPL does not require you to distribute software you otherwise would not