Alex Hudson wrote:
- Under '2. Vertragsgegenstand' there is a bold paragraph which goes like this (in German):
Vertragsgegenstand == contract?
object of agreement
"If the licensee modifies the software and makes this modification available to third parties, he is obligated to make available a copy of the modification to the licenser at no cost, or, if if the modification is available publicly and at no cost, to inform the licenser about the source."
Make your changes available to us free of charge. GPL states that any GPL program you modify must be licenced at _no_ charge, i.e., for free.
Nope. The only place the GPL talks of no charge (or rather "for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution") is when you distribute a binary and have to offer to provide sources (§3b).
Lutz Horn wrote:
It'd definitely be too much trouble to tell everybody I give a (modified) version of the software: "Hey, you got that from me under the terms of the GNU GPL but remember to adher to the additional conditions layed down in the AGBs of the original programer. What, they aren't reachable anymore? Too bad."
Not only trouble, but explicitly forbidden, the GPL is very clear on this: "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." (§6).
The original authors may impose such restrictions on you because they're not bound by their license(*), but you may not impose these restrictions on others, so if the original authors would require you to do so, you may not redisitribute it at all, §7.
(*) As long as they're the only copyright holders. As soon as they incorporate any code from others, given to them under GPL (and according to their AGB, they seem to want to do so), they would be bound by the GPL themselves and it would be illegal for them to distribute that code under their AGB.
IANAL, Frank