Re: PostgreSQL and Objective-C
Re: PostgreSQL and Objective-C
- Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Objective-C
- From: The Karl Adam <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:04:29 -0400
You do realize that large GPL projects normally have lots of authors,
committers, and patches submitted to them? You also realize that you
need to track down each and every one of these original authors to get
their express permission or terms for any code they have contributed
in order to be clear of the GPL?
This is of course assuming the project has a list of all the
submitters that put in effort to create the work that you want access
to. The GPL applies to all submissions to a GPL project so if you can
not secure the permission of even one person you cannot use that
product. The APSL expressly includes terms for the annotation of
author and contact info for patches and changesets to allow you to
more easily track people down for this sort of thing. Those provisions
exist in order to avoid that GPL mess.
Lastly, even if you track down every person that ever contributed code
to that product, there is no guarantee they will allow want to allow
you use of their work, nor is there anything that says the terms that
any of them will agree to are what you would consider fair. So while
he might have overstated(probably from experience) you are
understating completely by saying it is *merely* a small issue of
asking.
-Karl
On 4/16/05, p3consulting <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Le 16 avr., 2005, à 20:11, Andy Satori a écrit :
>
> > LGPL means you can link to it (dynamically), and ship it in binary
> > form if you don't modify the source (or do, and release those changes
> > back to the community) without also placing your code under the GPL.
> > The GPL, which I gather the MySQL client libraries now use, doesn't
> > even allow for that linking, if you incorporate GPL'd code in your
> > project, it's license overrules that of the derived project, and you
> > must release the changes and the derived code under the GPL.
> >
> > Unlike literary copyright, and plagiarism, it is not subject to the
> > 10% change rule, a single GPL'd file in a 1000 file project is enough
> > to invoke the GPL, and could be used to A) force the derived project
> > to Open Source, or B) after an expensive legal battle, and a public
> > relations black eye, remove the offending code and beg for
> > forgiveness.
> >
> > Or C) pay the owners of the code obscene licensing fees.
> >
> >
>
> Wrong:
> the general rule is
> "ask authorization to the owners to use their GPL/LGPL code under
> others conditions"
>
> to pay or not licensing fees is a product by product problem,
> and to be correct a ( author ; product ; who ask ; for what usage )
> problem.
>
> assuming (obscene) licensing fees is - to say the least - misleading.
>
> Pascal Pochet
> email@hidden
> ----------------------------------
> PGP
> KeyID: 0x208C5DBF
> Fingerprint: 9BFB 245C 5BFE 7F1D 64B7 C473 ABB3 4E83 208C 5DBF
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden