tags:

views:

842

answers:

4
  • Can I decide to change the license of my published GPL application to something closed-source [1]?
  • Can I integrate it into my own commercial application?

All code in the published GPL application written by me and there is no 3rd party GPL libraries in it.

Do I still keep the whole ownership of the code even after the GPL release?

[1] I know that people got rights to use old code or fork it which I'm fine with. But I don't want to get sued because I stole my own code :)

+19  A: 

As far as I can tell, you, being the owner of the code, can do whatever you want with it, including relicense it.

I don't think you'll be able to "take it back" from anyone who still has it, or prevent them from GPL'ing a fork or something.

GWLlosa
Yes, this is correct. You can re-license your own code any way you like (as long as you haven't accepted other people's contributions under the GPL) but you can't revoke existing licenses - i.e. you can stop distributing but other can keep distributing their copies.
ceejayoz
The "prevent from GPL'ing a fork" concept is important, and needs to be emphasized.
Joel Coehoorn
If your project mandates copyright reassignment when you accept patches, ceejayoz's concern about others' patches is not relevant. :)
cookiecaper
+7  A: 

You can license your code under multiple licenses. License it as both GPL and proprietary (like Qt used to).

Zifre
+3  A: 

Yes. You can release the code you have written yourself any time again under a different license or do whatever you want with it. You still keep the copyright on that code. GPL only applies to "copying, distribution and modification" as stated in the license itself.

But you cannot take back code you once released under GPL , you have to keep it available for the public (see comments).

Raim
I'm not a lawyer, but I think your last sentence is not correct. I'm not responsible for keeping my GPL'ed code available now and forever, it only must be released with every program based on the sources (whoever the publisher is is responsible for that and not myself)
0xA3
Wrong on the last sentence, @Raim. Such a restriction would be an unconscionably onerous one - it'd legally require GPL project contributors to pay for hosting in perpetuity! You can stop distributing GPL code any time you like, you just can't stop others from picking up the slack.
ceejayoz
Maybe I was a bit unclear with "code" here. Once you provided a GPL covered binary without source in the same distribution for download, the source has to be available from the same place. Even if you stop providing the binary, the source code has to be available. GPLv3, Section 6.
Raim
@Raim: only if you provided binary, only to the people that you've provided binary to, and you can make it available only explicit on request.
vartec
No, "in the same way through the same place". If the binary was available for download by everyone, the source has to be the same and must remain that way "for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements".
Raim
A: 

Can I decide to change the license of my published GPL application to something closed-source

Of course. The key is that it has to be yours and only yours. If you've accepted patches from other people, then the case is not so clear cut. Safe way would be to strip your code of these patches, and change it's license. Although in some legislatures, the contribution must be "significant" to even take in account, so you might get away with changing license of the code with patches.

vartec
I'm lucky (or a failure!) on that subject no send any patches or contributed at all :)
dr. evil