[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Combining GPL and commercial license

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Combining GPL and commercial license
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:52:00 +0200

Marcin Giedz wrote:
> problem with this) and commercial (for OUR code - simple to survive ) -
> but what about such things like libtiff and xpdf in this situation? Can
> we use it? If yes what is an obligation? 

Compliance with the GPL for GPL'd portions of your product. Ignore 
infections demands from GNUtians who want to "liberate" your own 
independent (under copyright law, according to the AFC test) works. 
Keep in mind that the GPL and its (FSF's) FAQ where written for GNU 
brainwashed retards like dak. FYI (from "IALNAP (I am lawyer, not a 

"I am reasoning from a legal background, and I believe that is also 
wat a judge would do. It is my general opinion, following Michael, 
that large portions of the FSF FAQ are simply wrong. "

"It is my belief that the GPL is horribly drafted. One should either 
choose the simplistic beauty of a BSD style license, or choose a 
carefully drafted legalese text, such as the IBM Public License."

As for IBM Public License, see

(EPL is just a slightly modified IPL/CPL with relaxed patent 
retaliation proviosions and changed Agreement Steward).

21. If I write a module to add to a Program licensed under the EPL
    and distribute the object code of the module along with the rest
    of the Program, must I make the source code to my module
    available in accordance with the terms of the EPL?

    No, as long as the module is not a derivative work of the


26. Some free software communities say that linking to their code
    automatically means that your program is a derivative work. Is
    this the position of the Eclipse Foundation?

    No, the Eclipse Foundation interprets the term "derivative work"
    in a way that is consistent with the definition in the U.S.
    Copyright Act, as applicable to computer software. Therefore,
    linking to Eclipse code might or might not create a derivative
    work, depending on all of the other facts and circumstances.

27. I"m a programmer not a lawyer, can you give me a clear cut
    example of when something is or is not a derivative work?

    If you have made a copy of existing Eclipse code and made a few
    minor revisions to it, that is a derivative work. If you"ve
    written your own Eclipse plug-in with 100% your own code to
    implement functionality not currently in Eclipse, then it is not
    a derivative work. Scenarios between those two extremes will
    require you to seek the advice of your own legal counsel in
    deciding whether your program constitutes a derivative work.

#27's "scenarios between those two extremes" is about the AFC test.

See also


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]