Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by skissane 2277 days ago
The GPL3 license allows people to "publish, distribute the app, or use it in a commercial way" (provided that they comply with the other GPL3 conditions, of course). So, when you say it is under GPL3, then say people can't do something which GPL3 allows, you are contradicting yourself.

If you release something under self-contradictory licensing terms, and then people use it in a way you didn't expect – maybe the problem was with your self-contradictory licensing?
2 comments
applecrazy 2277 days ago
If I understand GPL3 correctly, they still have to make the modified source available and state the changes they made. The header on GH that parses the license also seems to agree with me: https://github.com/mhdhejazi/CoronaTracker/blob/master/LICEN...
link
mhdhejazi 2277 days ago
I see your point here. Maybe I should have modified the license itself and stated that's it's a custom license. But they are still not complying with any of the GPL-3 conditions.
link