huisinro - Your missing the point. According to my understanding of the GPL once you add closed source to an open source GPL licensed application, you cannot redistribute it without providing access to all of the source code, Virtual Box's AND your closed source changes. Your closed source is Not closed any longer. By virtue of adding it to an App under GPL, your closed source becomes open source and you must provide the source code for it.
Its only when you change the existing code created by someone else that you have to release the source code, he has already done that. You can add your own extensions and code freely to any OSE program and because its your code, you have every right to keep it closed source.
You have admitted you changed the original as well as added closed source to the code.
I quote huisinro, "We have contributed our changes to the VirtualBox OSE,"
Where is your source code for this? You have not even provided this. Aside from your closed source, Not providing the source code for changes made to the original code is Clearly a major violation of GPL. There is no place on your download page to download any source code at all.
Committing the changes to the Virtualbox SVN is more than sufficent, if you want the code then get it from there.
You do have another license in your software.. one for your closed source. You cannot do this. The two license agreements conflict with and contradict each other. Because you based your end product on the VBox OSE, you cannot have another license to cover your closed source. This makes your closed source code license Null and Void. Because your closed source license, is not legal, I ask that you provide me full source code (both the changes you made to Virtual Box OSE and your closed source code) and all object files. I want to make my own application based on your software. According to the license for your base program, Virtual Box OSE, and it's GPL License, this is My Legal Right as I understand it.
You obviously don't understand the GPL very well
I develop a tool called Process Hacker thats licensed under the GPL3 and includes 4 completely different licences thanks to various 3rd party components we use, MS-PL, BSD, Apache and our own licence. There is no violation of the GPL by doing this. Best example I can give you is the fact NVidia drivers for Linux are completely closed source and you wouldn't have nvidia drivers for Linux if the GPL was that restrictive and forced everyone building applications on Linux to all be open-source just because its kernel is GPL3 code.
You seem to fail to understand, that when you decided to modify and add code to the Virtual Box OSE, to create VMLite, you ACCEPTED it's GPL License in it's entirety. Anything you do to the software including making a new application from it, must remain fully under that same GPL License - This includes your closed source additions.
Company's like Novell, RedHat, Smoothwall, Mandriva, ddwrt, Backtrack and many others do this all the time with Linux and don't provide their source code because they dont change the existing code, the code they do modify is submitted back to the SVN, however they add their own code and because it is theirs, they have every right to make it closed source as long as they inform the user its from an OpenSource project and provide them with a link to the licence and where they obtained the source.
Huisinro is and has done everything in compliance with the GPL, if he hadnt I would have raised the issue with the VirtualBox boys myself a long time ago
