[Discuss-gnuradio] Re: forced GPL in CGRAN? gr-ucla code in BBN repo not GPL?

[Thomas Schmid]

Right. I forgot that my code is a BSD license (UCLA policy states that
if we can choose, we should choose BSD). I also remember that we had
this discussion, or at least a similar one, before. I will check in my
archives if I can find it again.

Cheers,

Thomas

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 8:55 AM, George Nychis <address@hidden> wrote:
> Alright, I was hoping someone could clear this up for me in terms of the
> GPL, and we all know how vague it can be.
>
> Sorry to toss a private statement public, Eric, but you mention:
> "the license they pick must be compatible with the GPLv3, otherwise they
> can't use the existing code"
>
> Is this really true?
>
> The gr-ucla code might be a good example: I have permission from Thomas to
> put the gr-ucla code in CGRAN, but something that surprised me is that it is
> not under the GPL:
> http://acert.ir.bbn.com/viewvc/gr-ucla/trunk/README?revision=24&view=markup
>
> It doesn't re-use any GNU Radio code that I can find in the repository, but
> it will of course link to GNU Radio libraries.  Through some google
> searching, its a large dispute whether linking to a GPL library forces the
> "linker" to be under the GPL.  It isn't explicit.
>
> From http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatIsCompatible ...
>
> "If you just want to install two separate programs in the same system, it is
> not necessary that their licenses be compatible, because this does not
> combine them into a larger work."
>
> ... to me, that states gr-ucla does not need to be under the GPL.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> - George
>



-- 
"Don't complain; Just work harder" - Randy Pausch

Thomas Schmid, Ph.D. Candidate
Networked & Embedded Systems Laboratory (NESL)
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)

http://gresci.blogspot.com/ - Science articles on green technology