Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

5

If you are literally translating the C++ code that implements the algorithm, then you are creating a derived work of apt and you must license your code under the GPL as well. On the other hand, if you implement the algorithm based on a textual/mathematical description of the algorithm without looking at the C++ implementation, then your code is not a ...


4

Does your library depend on the GPL libraries for its proper functioning? If it does, then you have created a derived work, and your license must also be GPL. If your library does not depend on the GPL libraries for its proper functioning, and losing the GPL libraries does not substantially impair your library from working properly, then you should be able ...


4

You can distribute software A as GPL, but only without the additional features provided by proprietary library B. If you bind new features in software A to proprietary library B, then you must also distribute B's source code under the GPL. Binding the two softwares in this fashion creates a derivative work. The only way you might get away with licensing A ...


2

If you want an opinion that you can rely on, ask a lawyer. OpenJDK is licensed under the GPL (v2) with some exceptions. The GPL explicitly allows distribution of the software, including works (such as binaries) derived from the software. The exceptions don't change this. Historically, this was not true. But it is now. See point 1.


2

I am not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice. If I really had to do what you're asking, I would release two separate versions, one licensed GPL with the GPL'd component, and one licensed BSD without the GPL'd component. I don't think it would work to have one distribution with both "versions" in it because GPL is triggered by distribution, so since you're ...


2

There's no such major license, as FOSS licenses' primary goal is to maintain the "four freedoms" (or a part thereof for permissive licenses). Any restrictions on possible future functionality (apart from the odious DRM that Stallman banned in GPLv3, asserting it has no place in the future1) are seen as highly undesirable and are gonna condemn a license as ...


2

Assuming you are the copyright holder for all the code, then yes you can do this. But as I understand things, no other entity will be able to compliantly create a derived work and distribute it because of the incompatibility of the licenses for the code and the "resources". This problem doesn't apply to you since you're the owner of the code and hence ...



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