20

As far as I know, you are not required to agree to the GPL to make personal use of GPL-licensed software. You are only required to agree to the GPL to redistribute the software. The GPL prohibits distributors that have licensed the software under the GPL from imposing additional restrictions on the software. Forcing users to agree to the GPL to make personal use of GPL-licensed software could be seen as imposing an additional restriction.

However, some software installers require agreeing to whatever the license may be before using the software. That may be a proprietary license but it also might be the MIT license or the GPL. If the installer is provided by a non-copyright owner that licenses the software under the GPL, is it legal to distribute an installer requiring users to agree to the GPL before using the GPL-licensed software?

This question is closely related to this other question but is not covered by that question.

Reinstate Monica
  • 453
  • 3
  • 8
  • 3
    Note that if you find some software like this, the GPL itself is what allows you (if you were so inclined), to take that software, to remove that "license click through" screen and then to re-release your new improved version. Alternatively, you could simply improve the user interface - you could display the license as a convenience to the user but don't offer "Accept" or "Reject" buttons, no Yes/No buttons, since those kind of buttons are misleading as you've pointed out here. Just show the license similar to a way README files are sometimes shown and then allow closing it conveniently. – Brandin May 17 '23 at 22:07
  • 1
    Of course if you do this you must take the GPL's "Appropriate Legal Notices" requirements into account. I don't know if this kind of screen really counts as an "Appropriate Legal Notice" as mentioned in the GPL. I have an instinct to say "no it does not" but I'm not completely sure. – Brandin May 17 '23 at 22:10
  • 2
    @Brandin not if the installer itself is proprietary and simply copies GPL-licensed files – lights0123 May 18 '23 at 00:37
  • @lights0123: Good point, but could create your own installer or package the GPL software with a different installer. Unless the proprietary installer has some important logic of what to install where or system-detection or whatever, and/or also installs some non-GPL software. – Peter Cordes May 18 '23 at 02:24
  • @lights0123 If the installer contained priority information on installing the product you would have to provide seperate installation instructions - do a find for "Installation Information" in GPL v3 - they already covered that loophole - the same section also covers providing the source in a standard format - a locked installer wouldn't qualify. – DavidT May 18 '23 at 08:47
  • "Forcing users to agree to the GPL to make personal use of GPL-licensed software could be seen as imposing an additional restriction". I don't think this question is complete without elaboration on what restriction you think is imposed. It isn't a contract - it's a list of conditions under which distribution of the software is permitted. You are bound by it whether you agree to it or not. – preferred_anon May 19 '23 at 10:00
  • @preferred_anon - If I have the source code to any (legally I.e. not stolen code) GPL licensed program, you can't force me to do anything other than than comply with terms of the GPL, since any "perceived" restriction in the source can simply be edited out and the application re-compiled/execution without the restriction. – DavidT May 19 '23 at 11:17
  • @DavidT I don't understand your comment. I am talking about legal restrictions - it seems you are talking about limitations of the software. I am simply saying that the GPL does not impose any legal restrictions (it provides additional freedoms, subject to constraints). Even though your comment seems unrelated to mine - we seem to agree that there are no relevant restrictions. So I don't quite understand your reply. – preferred_anon May 19 '23 at 11:22
  • 1
    Okay what was not clear to me was the meaning of "it" in your comment "You are bound by it whether you agree to it or not." I thought you were referring to any agreement you made when you clicked through - I see now that you may have meant the "it" was the GPL. – DavidT May 19 '23 at 11:41
  • @preferred_anon It's probably not technically a restriction, but it seems to go against point 9 of the GPL (which says that your acceptance of the license is not required to run the program). In practice it means that if a GPL-refusing person wants to use the software, then he would have to click "Yes" on such a screen, which is a lie. I'm not such a person, but suppose I wanted to claim "I didn't accept the GPL, yet I can still run the program" then in fact I couldn't claim that anymore; since I clicked the "yes" button, it seems like I still accepted the license in some manner. – Brandin May 22 '23 at 06:52

1 Answers1

32

FSF has explained in their FAQ on GPLv3:

Some software packaging systems have a place which requires you to click through or otherwise indicate assent to the terms of the GPL. This is neither required nor forbidden. With or without a click through, the GPL's rules remain the same.

Due to the fact that GPL does not place any obligations on the user of a software, agreeing to the license does not have any effect on personal use.

Martin_in_AUT
  • 7,205
  • 10
  • 37