Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

7

For the regular GPL, the answer is no. Quoth the FSF FAQ: Q: Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require that these designs must be free? A: In general this is legally impossible; copyright law does not give you any say in the use ...


3

Short answer: you're not forced to release your software under GPL; you can do it because you're making interoperability with GPL software and this doesn't make your software a derivative work (but if you want to feel more safe then don't distribute Git inside your application package, a dependency is OK). Dirty workaround to avoid licensing headaches: note ...


3

According to the FSF, you cannot: Please note that the GNU AGPL is not compatible with GPLv2. It is also technically not compatible with GPLv3 in a strict sense: you cannot take code released under the GNU AGPL and convey or modify it however you like under the terms of GPLv3, or vice versa. However, you are allowed to combine separate modules or ...


2

Either of your options is a valid way of complying with the license, but from a practical standpoint the second is preferable because it allows developers to work more easily with your modified code. As to including the license string in the binary, I'm not convinced I see the point - who's going to be looking for it there?


2

The answer by Andriano Repetti is perhaps correct but you should ask a lawyer (and I am not a lawyer neither), or perhaps the FSF or the copyright owners of the gitsoftware. Be aware that some people think (and I believe that) if you adapt some GPL software (even if you publish your adapted source code under GPL!) to communicate with your own proprietary ...


2

Can I take a GPL program and resilience my changes under the AGPL? No, you are not allowed to change the licence. GPL code has to contain the GPL, and it is not allowed to change the licence. Say I clone a GPL project, make some changes, can I only allow people to use my changes under the AGPL license? See above : you are not allowed to modify ...


2

IANAL. I think it depends on whether your app is a 'derived work' of the GCIDE database. If your app is a general dictionary-interacting app that works with any dictionary you import into it, that's one thing. But it sounds like your app is fundamentally dependent on the GPL GCIDE database, so the case for it being a derived work is strong. Derived works ...


2

This is indeed a great question. And the reason why it is great because it moves mere copyright domain to intellectual property domain. And the moment you talk about IP - there is no one way right! OK - in a nutshell let me rephrase this so that I know that I have understood right! Basically there are two pieces of software one is client and one is server. ...


2

The intention of the GPL is to ensure the maximal possible freedom for the (end-)users of GPLed code. Therefore: you may freely use GPLed software, even in closed source applications. The GPL does not require that you open-source your code. when you re-distribute/convey GPLed software, you must use the GPL license so that your users enjoy the same freedom ...


2

IANAL, but as far as I understand you have nothing to worry about: Copyleft only transfers to Derivative Work - that is, a program that contains parts of the copyleft program. Dynamic linking is a legal gray area(RMS claims it transfers copyleft, others claims it doesn't, I don't know if it was ever discussed in court). I've never heard anyone claiming it ...



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