Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] License for libs linked in OOT

[Jan Krämer]

Hey Silvain,

I think I talked to Tom about this some years ago, and he stated that the GNURadio OOT block code has to be GPLv3 or at least a compatible license. Because that for sure is a derivative work. But you might be right that it does not need to be strictly GPLv3 and Tom might have also stated exactly that and I just don't remember.

But thanks for the answer, it makes my attempts to push for FOSS at work a lot easier (Not using GPLv3 cause it is considered evil here :/).

Cheers,

Jan

2016-07-07 11:43 GMT+02:00 Sylvain Munaut <address@hidden>:

> I think the GNURadio OOT block glue has to be GPLv3 in any case and that is
> fine.

Why ?

As long as the license is GPLv3 compatible you can publish it under
what you like.
Now of course when re-distributed as binary/complete system, the
effective license will be GPLv3 because the gplv3 compatibility often
uses the "sub-licence" clause to be compatible ...

But if someone wants to extract parts of your code he can do that and
use it as whatever license you used. Same thing if they somehow
re-implement an API compatble runtime that doesn't rely on gpl code
for instance.

And that obviously applies to whatever lib you use as well. (Actually
if that lib is "standalone" and not tied to GR in anyway, it's
probably not considered a "derivative work" and so it can be any
license you like, doesn't even need to be GPL compatible, but that may
prevent binary distributions though depending on details)

(Of course IANAL ... but I'm pretty sure of what I'm saying at least in the EU).

Cheers,

    Sylvain