Hi all,
please consider the following hypothetical scenario.
1. Software vendor V produces a proprietary program P. This program has some function which can be implemented by using an existing and excellent library L. Since this library is covered by the GNU GPL, V can not use L with his proprietary program P and distribute the whole unless he places the whole under the GPL as well.
2. Since the function which could be implemented using L is really needed, V programs a replacement R for L which he is free to distribute under any license he wishes.
3. Customer C gets P from V. He is unsatisfied by the quality of the replacement R and asks V if he can change P so that it uses the superior free library L. V walks over to C's place and changes P to use L instead of R. He does not change the proprietary license under which he provided P to C in the first place.
Now please consider this question:
Is V violating the terms of the GPL in step 3? Is it possible to say that he is _not redistributing_ a work including both code form L covered by the GPL and his own proprietary code and that he is _not violating_ the GPL since 2.b) of the GPL only aplies to distributing or publishing? Can V claim that he is only providing a service in altering P after he distributed it and that altering can not be called distribution?
It is my strong believe that answering the above questions with 'yes' is at least against the spirit of the GPL. But is it against it's words, too?
Regards Lutz