|
> They distribute packages for Linux distro's, where the GPL is listed as the license for the package, instead they should be listed as custom or proprietary. No, you are confused about the meaning of the license label: that's the terms they are offering downstream (e.g., what permissions, and with what conditions, people getting the package from them have), not the terms they are bound by. If upstream is proprietary, but the distributor has purchased the right to offer GPL downstream, GPL is the correct label. If upstream is permissive open source, and the distributor has decided to only offer GPL downstream, GPL is the correct label. If the distributor is the sole copyright holder and bound by nothing, and has decided to offer GPL downstream, GPL is the correct label. If upstream is offered to the public under the GPL, but the distributor has a special deal for an exemption from a particular term with the upstream distributor, but is still offering GPL downstream, GPL is the correct label. While the copyleft nature of the GPL is that people offering it to the public will often be obligated to particular upstream partners to also observe its restriction, upstream and downstream licensing are different things, and the label on a package is the downstream offer, not the upstream commitment. As a recipient, their obligation to you is to honor the offer they have made to you, which is simply that you may distribute under the conditions in the GPL. |