Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

16

Software can be dual licensed if all the copyright holders agree. Most companies that have a dual licensed product and accept contributions have some form of contributor license agreement that must be accepted before you can contribute code. In the case of ExtJS, it says: You hereby grant to Sencha and to recipients of software distributed by or on ...


7

Yes, undistributed improvements don't need to have source code released. This was an intentional decision when designing the GPL; you're allowed to modify the code for your own purposes without needing to tell anyone what you're doing, or to distribute anything related to it. The GPL was never intended to say "if you improve the code, you must release the ...


7

Dual licences Software licences are not exclusive, you can give the same code to everyone under terms of licence A, and to some people (who pay you) under the different terms of licence B. Of course, that refers to your code. If other people develop and distribute additions to your system under the GPL, then you can always reintroduce them back to your ...


6

The GPL requires all derivative works to be licensed under the GPL as well. If you fork a GPLed software and distribute your fork, then you are required to offer your software under the GPL. This implies that you have to make the source code available. From the GPL v3: 5. Conveying Modified Source Versions. You may convey a work based on the ...


5

An aggregate is a collection of programs that are not collectively bound by the GPL. In other words, they are not a collective work. A collective work is bound by the GPL because the individual programs or modules form a collective whole. An aggregate is not bound by the GPL because The individual programs, if they communicate with each other, do so at ...


5

1) Can someone sell a fork of an open-source software under GPL without distributing the source? Example: Can I modify a little bit GIMP, repackage it under another name, and sell it as a commercial product without giving source code (like Adobe Photoshop) ? Holy cow NO! That's exactly the sort of behavior that the FSF made the GPL to fight ...


4

In order to attach your own license to code, you must own the copyright. Generally speaking, that means that it must be code that you have written. As an example, there are libraries out there already that provide some capability I want in my program. I have two choices: I can either live with the license that the library provides, or I can write my own ...


4

Your code needs to be released under the GPLv3 as you believe it is a derivative work of the algs4.jar implementation. Other projects utilizing your code will likely need to be released as GPLv3. Most larger applications just incorporate code from smaller projects, and treat the smaller code base as part of the larger. That will trigger the "viral" aspect ...


3

Short version: Probably. Ask a lawyer to be sure. Long version: The key part of this question boils down to "what amount of code is protectable under copyright?" That's what the GPL is founded on - copyright protections. If you can't copyright something, then the GPL can't protect it. Fortunately, there's a paper that was written by the Software ...


3

This situation is covered in the GNU GPL FAQ, in the section "I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?" in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and non-free programs communicate at arms length, that they ...


2

This depends on who contributed to the system X. Case 1: You did it all by yourself You are the sole copyright owner of system X. You have decided to distribute that code under a viral open source license. You may at any point stop offering the system under such a license, although you can't cancel existing *GPL licenses or prevent other people from ...


2

You asked: Can I just put the usual GPL headers on my source files, include the GPL in COPYING and leave it at that? Yes, that's fine. Or do I have to collect together all the licences and source code (both python and, e.g. C/C++ dependencies) for everything that I import and include these in my distribution? No, because they won't be released as ...


2

And, I am NOT going to distribute any GPL application (neither its sources) packaged together with CSCS. Copyright controls who is allowed to distribute something, not who is allowed to use it. If you don't distribute the GPL application, you can't infringe copyright, even if you depend strongly on it. Your user could infringe the conditions on which ...


2

I am not a lawyer - this is not legal advise. You have copyright over the application (or parts of it) that you wrote, so you have a legal claim your rights have been infringed regardless of the status of the open source licenses and your obligation to open-source the code you own the copy right to. The issue over your obligation to open-source your ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible