On 12/12/2020 18:44, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 17:27, Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty wrote:
>> Do the points made here also apply to commercial but open-source use of
>> Cygwin?
>>
>> For extra context, I have an application with bundles parts of Cygwin
>> and libraries built against Cygwin. None of the source or binaries is
>> modified.
>>
>> I know I at least have to state which packages are included in the
>> bundle and provide links to the source for those, but I am not sure if
>> it is required that I eg provide a downloadable compressed folder with
>> complete source for everything.
>>
>> Can anyone give me some advice? The work everyone does for Cygwin is
>> valuable and I certainly don't intend to claim any of it is mine.
> The discussion in this thread so far, as best I can tell, amounts to
> "you need to comply with the license agreements in the packages you
> distribute". That is definitely the case for commercial open-source
> projects as much as it is for anything else.
>
> In my opinion, the safest way to make sure you're compliant is to
> provide all the source code for all the binaries you're distributing
> in the same way you make those binaries available; if you're shipping
> software on CD, ship the source code on the same CD; if you're
> shipping software by providing a download link, provide a download
> link nearby to the source code. In particular, it's not sufficient to
> merely point to the Cygwin website or even Cygwin mirrors, as those
> could disappear while you're still legally obliged to provide source
> code for at least anything with a GPL/LGPL/&c license.
>
> That all being said, I am not a lawyer, and I have no particular
> authority in the Cygwin project to assert what is and isn't
> permissible. Particularly for any commercial use, I would want
> professional legal advice on anything I wasn't confident about.
>
> HTH
>
> Adam

Thanks, that's to conclusion I came to for GPL'd code as well, just
wanted another opinion.

Hamish