Reading PDF - a cry for help
bdrunrev at gmail.com
Sat Oct 1 09:40:57 CDT 2011
You're either extremely knowledgeable about the GPL, or I think you
have misunderstood the GPL.
The GPL v2 does not mean you cannot charge for re-distribution of GPL
code (there are companies who charge for the re-distribution of linux
on dvds). If your code is bound to GPL libraries and you distribute
that combined artifact then you might have issues. If your code calls
out to compiled programs (using shell() then there is no issue). A
very strict interpretation is that if your code is bound to libraries,
then you are bound to provide your souce should someone demand it, or
cease using the libraries in that case. There are those who dispute
that even binding to libraries does not fall within the GPL v2.
GPL v3 was brought in to stop so many companies "exploiting" GPL on
the server-side (i.e. where there is no re-distribution of code).
Unless the code you want to use to provide such a web service is
licensed under GPL v3, I cannot see what the issue would be. I know
of very few projects using GPL v3.
And not all open source licenses have the same copyleft implications
as the GPL. If you are distributing RunRev's ssl library with your
apps, you are re-distributing open source code (only this time it is
the Apache license + SSL license). It is always possible that
companies negotiate a separate non-GPL license for GPL code they wish
to incorporate and re-distribute.
Anyway, I hope the first suggestion works for you so that you do not
even need to consider these issues.
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Graham Samuel <livfoss at mac.com> wrote:
since mine is a commercial product, there would presumably be
licensing issues for a non-GNU developer.
More information about the use-livecode