Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [epl-discuss] Source distribution and network users of the licensed work / ASP loophole

The Orion client (the parts delivered to user's browser) are dual-licensed EDL/EPL. So someone can clearly fork and charge for a variant of Orion client by consuming it via the EDL. But for the sake of discussion I assume this is just an example and you are asking about what would happen for browser-based applications licensed under EPL alone. I guess what you are driving at here is whether a hosted web service is considered "distribution of the program" as defined by the EPL? This still seems to be a matter under debate and I think it is worth clarifying in an EPL revision. I think the MPL has a nice definition of distribution in their FAQ:


Oliver Kopp <koppdev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on 07/06/2013 05:00:15 AM:

> While thinking about the implications of licensing a work under the
> EPL, I checked the license about "usage via network". For instance, if
> one forks Eclipse Orion, improves it significantly and makes that
> available online for a monthly fee, he is not required to publish the
> source code again, is he? If it was Eclipse and he sold an Eclipse
> variant, only the changes in the "core" (EPL-covered-part) of Eclipse
> had to be published again. This is not the case in the Orion example,
> is it?
> In other words, I'm asking for an improvement similar what Affero did
> to the GPL: closing the "ASP loophole".

Back to the top