Apple not providing LGPL webkit source code for latest iOS 4.3.x

For iOS 4.1, which came out in September 2010, absolutely no GPL code for it (or later versions, like 4.2) was posted until March 2011. That's not 8 weeks: that's about 6 <i>months</i>.<p>When comex (<a href="http://twitter.com/comex" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/comex</a>) and saurik (<a href="http://saurik.com/" rel="nofollow">http://saurik.com/</a>) asked for it (via emails to opensource@apple.com and copyright@apple.con) around last November, I don't think they got any response from Apple —until this year. Then, Apple let them know that it would be up "within a week". I think the iOS 4.1 and 4.2 code actually went up about three weeks after they received that email.<p>saurik has even more examples of them not releasing the [L]GPL'd code near the top of this post: <a href="http://www.saurik.com/id/4" rel="nofollow">http://www.saurik.com/id/4</a> — "Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Apple ends up on the bad end of a GPL-related lawsuit."<p>(In my opinion, the fact Apple has posted <i>any</i> code for iOS 4.3 at this point is a big step in the right direction: they're not perfect yet, but at least they've got 8/10 of the projects up.)

Apple, as with many other companies, does not understand that it has to release the source simultaneously with the program using it.<p>Despite the articles claim, Apple has not released the source in s timely manner for previous versions of iOS, instead waiting for it to be pointed out or for version N+1 or N+2 to be released first.

As a hardcore Apple fan, I strongly hope one of the non-Apple contributors to Webkit sends a source request to Apple with the implicit threat of lawsuit.<p>Big companies don't treat others with kid gloves when it comes to licensing and copyright, so why should we take it from them?

While in all likelihood it's a legal and bureaucratic issue causing delay, I can see how this is considered bad form.<p>However, I've made an attempt at understanding the source release obligations under the GPL and all I get from it is: When you release to the public, you've got to release the source. But at no point have I found a "it has to be released immediately."<p><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic" rel="nofollow">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePos...</a><p>The only clause I can see Apple potentially hiding under is Section 3.B of the GPL. ie. as long as they have the door open for written requests all is well.<p><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html</a><p>Can someone please clarify for me how the "well intended" spirit of the license works versus the real world legalities and requirements ?

I'm still waiting for that "open" FaceTime specification.

Are you sure about that?<p><a href="http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore" rel="nofollow">http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore</a><p>Edit: I would greatly appreciate an explanation of what is inappropriate about the above link.

You just need the copyright owners to sue now. The copyright holders can also ask the SFLC do it for them, I'm sure they would love it.

So is the issue here that they have not packaged it up for people and put it on opensource.apple.com? Is the source not available in the official repository at webkit.org?

Who holds the copyright on that webkit source code in question?

We have an update! <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2530086" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2530086</a>

Knowing how evil and secretive Apple is, I would not expect them to care much about open licenses.

This only becomes a real issue when one of the KHTML copyright holders makes it an issue<p>which they haven't.

Anyone else find this to be a bit over-dramatic?<p>They have released every other version and just haven't released the 4.3.x one yet. There is no indication that they refuse to release it ever, the site still says "Coming Soon" and it has still been &#60; 2 months since 4.3 was released.<p>Yes, I understand that under the GPL they're supposed to release it simultaneously with the launch, which they failed to do, but is this really front page news?