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

[Martin Braun]

Everyone,

I very much appreciate this discussion, and it's nice to see no one
getting heated up about this topic. Still, I would suggest we leave it
at the references to the FSF and their legal advice at this point, we
probably can't add much more to this discussion without starting to go
into difficult territory.

Licensing is a serious topic, and I'm glad we're talking about it in a
serious fashion.

Thanks, everyone,

Martin

On 07/17/2016 01:16 PM, Marcus Müller wrote:
> Hi Forest,
> 
> I'm pretty sure it's not quite like that:
> 
> It does exchange data structures and calls into GR/gets called from GR,
> so it needs a GPLv3-compatible license, but not necessarily the GPLv3
> itself.
> 
> In essence, fully agree with Sylvain's POV.
> 
> Cheers,
> Marcus
> 
> On 17.07.2016 21:32, Forest Crossman wrote:
>> Jan,
>>
>> If your OOT module uses GNU Radio data structures or function calls
>> (i.e., the API), then it can only be distributed under the GPL. This
>> is because the work is "based on" GNU Radio[1]. Since a work "based
>> on" a GPL'd work can only be distributed under the same license[2],
>> your OOT module would have to be licensed under the GPLv3+. It works
>> the same way in Wireshark, where any plugins developed for it can only
>> be distributed under the GPLv2+ or the GPLv3+.
>>
>> Of course, you can release any code not based on GNU Radio (i.e.,
>> implementations of algorithms that could operate independently of GNU
>> Radio) under any license you want, so in essence you would be
>> dual-licensing a portion of the OOT module, but that could get legally
>> tricky very quickly.
>>
>> To be clear, I'm not a lawyer, and I could be wrong, so don't take any
>> of this as legal advice. For that, I would consult the Software
>> Freedom Law Center[3]. If you want more non-lawyer advice, #fsf on
>> Freenode could probably give you some more pointers.
>>
>> On a more cynical note, none of this license stuff really matters if
>> nobody sues you, so if you were to technically violate the GPL but do
>> it in a way that didn't make anyone too angry, you could probably get
>> away with it.
>>
>> [1]: "To 'modify' a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of
>> the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the
>> making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a 'modified
>> version' of the earlier work or a work 'based on' the earlier work."
>> [2]: "You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications
>> to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
>> terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these
>> conditions: ... You must license the entire work, as a whole, under
>> this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy."
>> [3]: https://softwarefreedom.org
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Jan Krämer <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Hey everyone,
>>>
>>> thanks for your answers guys, I think you clarified pretty much everything.
>>> Now all I can do is wait for an answer from management.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> 2016-07-07 19:02 GMT+02:00 Martin Braun <address@hidden>:
>>>> Jan,
>>>>
>>>> also, don't forget, code you write is yours. You can even have multiple
>>>> licenses for the same code (at least for modules and parts that don't
>>>> use GNU Radio or other GPL'd libraries).
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On 07/07/2016 06:18 AM, Jan Krämer wrote:
>>>>> Thanks Michael, now fingers crossed that I am allowed to publish the
>>>>> code under one of those licenses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Jan
>>>>>
>>>>> 2016-07-07 12:18 GMT+02:00 Michael Dickens <address@hidden
>>>>> <mailto:address@hidden>>:
>>>>>
>>>>>     __
>>>>>     What Sylvain wrote is correct: if you publish your GR OOT module,
>>>>>     then you have to choose GPLv3 or a compatible FOSS license. I
>>>>>     believe that by default the license is GPLv3, since that's what GR
>>>>>     is. See also < http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > for a
>>>>>     list of compatible (and incompatible) licenses. - MLD
>>>>>
>>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>>     Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>>>>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>>>>>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>>> address@hidden
>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>