GPL code moving upstream

Question

I have a GPL open source project that in its early days is going to be of interest mostly to academics and research groups.

This group can sometimes be very competitive, and a research group could modify and improve the code for their internal use but never release it. The GPL says this is fine, since they have not distributed the code. They are only using it for their internal use, it is owned by them, but doesn't really have a license because it's not being "distributed". But if they choose to distribute the code, it has to be under the same GPL license as mine. Good enough by me.

My question: what if someone from this group asked questions on my forum and included snippets of my code as was modified by them, either by attaching a zip or pasting it directly into the forum.

• Doesn't that mean that the code is being made public and has been distributed?
• so shouldn't I be able to add it now into the main project?
• Should I care if this researcher did so by mistake or without the approval of his whole team or not?

I understand the code is still owned by this group and stays owned by them (whether they release it as GPL or keep it private), but being posted like this sounds to me like it's been distributed and therefore is distributed under the same GPL license and can be added upstream to the main project.

Answer 1

If you are concerned about the groups pasting code snippets for the purpose of asking questions, that I think comes under the terms of "Fair Use" (see wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use). The wiki article defines it as "... limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research...". In effect, I think that does not amount to breach of license.

Answer 2

There is a relatively common misunderstanding of the GPL.

If I take a GPL project, modify it, and publish it, that new work does not automatically fall under the GPL:

I have a choice - I can distribute in violation of your copyright, or I can distribute it under the GPL.

If I distribute in violation of your copyright, there is no obligation to open the code, but I can be sued for damages and/or ordered to stop distribution. I might choose to open the code to avoid that, but I am not obligated to.

So - I don't think you can assume you can use such code, as you may be looking at an illegal republication, not a distribution under the GPL.

Standard disclaimer: you should take legal advice, I am not a lawyer, the above is not legal advice.