Software licenses and releasing Python programs for review

[Karl A. Krueger]

Andreas Kostyrka <andreas at kostyrka.org> wrote:
> *) GPL is not acceptable for "library" stuff, because as a software
>   developer I'm sometimes forced to do "closed" stuff.
>   (Yep, even nowadays there are place where it's basically a legal
>    requirement.)

I'm curious about this last one.

The GPL does not require that derivative works be published, or that
they be donated back to the original author.  All it requires is that
you pass on the rights that you received to the recipient of your
derivative work -- in this case, your customer alone.

Of course, if your customer is a proprietary software firm looking to
own and sell the software restrictively, then they don't want those
terms.  But if they're just looking to use it privately and internally,
I'm curious how the GPL would get in the way of that.

-- 
Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at example.edu> { s/example/whoi/ }