Re: People who develop with MySQL and/or other GPL based code
Re: People who develop with MySQL and/or other GPL based code
- Subject: Re: People who develop with MySQL and/or other GPL based code
- From: Alastair Houghton <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:51:45 +0000
On 31 Dec 2003, at 17:43, Creed Erickson wrote:
>
On Wednesday, December 31, 2003, at 08:58 AM, Chris Ridd wrote:
>
>
> I don't think that matters. Your program links against libodbc.dylib
>
> (the
>
> open source iODBC stuff Apple's included since Jaguar), and therefore
>
> doesn't link against MyODBC. As a result, your program doesn't depend
>
> on
>
> ("isn't a derivative work" of) MyODBC, and therefore doesn't have to
>
> be
>
> GPLed.
>
>
>
This is the crux of the problem, IMHO. If you look at direct
>
dependencies, then your program is not linked to and does not derive
>
from the GPL source. However, if you remove the GPL object code from
>
the system, your program will no longer work. Does this secondary
>
dependency constitute a derivation?
IANAL, but as I understand it, no, it does not.
>
The language has been muddy with regard to the definition of
>
"derivative work."
Actually I think the GPL is fairly clear about what is and is not a
derivative work; it says:
a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any
derivative work
under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or
a portion
of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into
another language.
It also states explicitly that:
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections
of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably
considered
independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and
its terms, do
not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate
works.
So, given that your program is not "a work containing the Program or a
portion of it", you are fine. Even if it does, you can remove the
GPL'd part and use the remainder in any way you see fit (including
replacing the GPL'd part with a non-GPL'd part and releasing the result
as a new version of your program).
The Linux community has muddied the waters slightly, by releasing the
Linux kernel under GPL, but including a special exception that allows
the use of binary-only kernel modules (e.g. for graphics card drivers).
There has also been a good deal of FUD from Microsoft and their cohort,
who typically tell the press that GPL'd software is dangerous because
it might force someone to distribute the source code for their
proprietary software (for example, if their developers accidentally
link with some GPL'd code); this is, however, not the case... you can
simply stop distributing the software in question until you have had
the opportunity to replace all GPL-covered code with new non-GPL'd
code.
Kind regards,
Alastair.
[demime 0.98b removed an attachment of type application/pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.