Re: Making code available & license (was Re: Examles from apple webobjects 5.4.3 any good)
Re: Making code available & license (was Re: Examles from apple webobjects 5.4.3 any good)
- Subject: Re: Making code available & license (was Re: Examles from apple webobjects 5.4.3 any good)
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:49:28 -0700
I trust they had no issue with the ECL?
On May 12, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote:
> The linux journal article specifically states that the definition of a
> derivative work is very muddy. There are several "tests" that the GPL
> licenses ask to clarify the usage of the included libraries - I.e. How is
> it used? Static linked, dynamic linked, etc.
>
> Bottom line - if you get into an IP dispute with a lawyer, it is going to
> cost you money regardless of how right you feel you are in your usage of a
> component.
>
> Our investors and corporate counsel has taken a conservative approach and
> dictated - NO GPL, LGPLv3, EPL, MPL licenses. Period.
>
> Dov
>
> On 5/12/11 12:04 PM, "Ramsey Gurley" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 12, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Dov Rosenberg wrote:
>>
>>> The key part of the GPL license that poisons its use for commercial
>>> purposes is the very first clause:
>>>
>>> 0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains
>>> a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
>>> under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below,
>>> refers to any such program or work, and 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.
>>>
>>> If your program makes use of a piece of GPL code and will not function
>>> without it it is considered a derivative work and must be distributed
>>> under the GPL license.
>>
>> To my knowledge, this is a statement of opinion with no basis in case
>> law. Furthermore, according to IP Law Specialist and OSI general counsel
>> Lawrence Rosen:
>>
>> "The primary indication of whether a new program is a derivative work is
>> whether the source code of the original program was used, modified,
>> translated or otherwise changed in any way to create the new program. If
>> not, then I would argue that it is not a derivative work."
>>
>> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6366
>>
>> That is also how I read section 2 of GPL v2.
>>
>> I haven't gotten a C&D from the GPL police yet, so I can only assume
>> we're fine. In fact, if you think Wonder is in violation of the GPL, I
>> would encourage you to report it immediately:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
>>
>>
>> Ramsey
>>
>>>
>>> We had to remove the MySQL JDBC driver from our software that we used
>>> to ship as a convenience for customers. They can download it themselves
>>> and use it but we can not supply it as part of our commercial product.
>>>
>>> The SAP/Oracle lawsuit was based on the fact that even though you can
>>> download anything for free off Oracle's website to evaluate you are
>>> still bound by the terms of the license agreement that you have to agree
>>> to get the software, regardless if you read and or understand it.
>>> Whether it is distributing a jar that should be paid for, or using a
>>> component in an unlicensed manner either of those things are cause for a
>>> lawsuit. Especially if you are a large company with deep pockets
>>>
>>> Dov
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/12/11 10:28 AM, "Ramsey Gurley"
>>> <email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 12, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Dov Rosenberg wrote:
>>>
>>> Depends if you want to make money from your app or not. In either case
>>> the license that you release your app under can't violate the terms of
>>> any of the components included in your app. If you included GPL licensed
>>> components it would be a violation of the GPL license to charge money
>>> for your app. See the note from the GPL v2 license below
>>> 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
>>> of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
>>> distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
>>> above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
>>> Š
>>> b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
>>> whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
>>> part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>>> parties under the terms of this License.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry... am I misreading something?
>>>
>>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
>>>
>>> That section is based on the opening statement. I'm not a lawyer, but
>>> I like to believe I have a pretty firm grasp of the english language. As
>>> far as I can tell, 2 b) only applies if you first "modify your copy or
>>> copies of the Program".
>>>
>>> Nowhere does it state that including a GPL'ed binary library in your
>>> app forbids you from selling your own code under any license you see
>>> fit. To further clarify 2 a) b) and c), the license immediately follows
>>> with:
>>>
>>> "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"
>>>
>>> Regarding the article you linked to, I don't see any mention of OSS or
>>> GPL anywhere. It appears to be an article about piracy of commercial
>>> enterprise software. I certainly didn't see any corroborating
>>> information or case law which would interpret the above statements as:
>>> "it would be a violation of the GPL license to charge money for your app"
>>>
>>>
>>> Ramsey
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list
>>> (email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>)
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>
>>> a.com
>>>
>>> This email sent to email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> .com
>>
>> This email sent to email@hidden
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Come to WOWODC this July for unparalleled WO learning opportunities and real peer to peer problem solving! Network, socialize, and enjoy a great cosmopolitan city. See you there! http://www.wocommunity.org/wowodc11/
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden