Package lacks of requirements of GPL license

Question

I am actually modifying a package under the GPLv3 License which according to a page requires to:

Include a copy of the license and copyright notice with the code.

However such package/code don't have the license nor the copyright notice on each file. Can I modify significantly the code of such package?

In typical jurisdictions, the absence of a license means the user has no rights, the author has all rights. Them failing to apply a license "properly" only means that you're in a worse place. — Lars Viklund, Oct 25 '16 at 13:29
And "Include a copy of the license and copyright notice with the code" does not imply that each file must contain that information, as it says there must be a license and copyright notice in the package. Have you looked for a license.txt or copyright.txt file in the package? — Bent, Oct 25 '16 at 13:32
@Bent Yes, there isn't a license, License, license.txt or copyright.txt or similar file. — llrs, Oct 25 '16 at 13:38
@LarsViklund Thanks, I thought it would be that the case, that's why most of my repositories lack of license. Maybe it should be an answer? — llrs, Oct 25 '16 at 13:40
Possible duplicate of [What is the “default” software license?](http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/26548/what-is-the-default-software-license) — gnat, Oct 25 '16 at 14:09
@gnat the code had on the official repository a license listed, but it is not in the source code. I am not asking about which license the authors are willing to license it, but how can I work with the situation I described — llrs, Oct 25 '16 at 14:13
@gnat: I don't think that guidance really applies here. Despite the apparent lack of labelling, the OP is still aware that the software is licensed under GPLv3. — Robert Harvey, Oct 25 '16 at 20:17
It seems that question about licensing is being discused on [meta](http://meta.softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/q/8284/204570), so voters on deleting the question, please wait until a conclusion is reached — llrs, Oct 31 '16 at 15:22

score 3 · Accepted Answer · edited Oct 25 '16 at 20:19

If you know that the code is GPLv3, then you should also know that you are not allowed to file the serial numbers off of it and slap your own copyright and license on it.

If the original code is GPLv3, your modified version of that code must also be GPLv3.

If you're so inclined, you can contact the copyright holder of the code and ask them to remedy the deficiencies you have noted by adding the necessary copyright statements and license files.

Package lacks of requirements of GPL license

1 Answers1