gpl

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Learn more . Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow. I have a commercial web app that uses a component under LGPL. Since this component has a plug in architecture, I have now created a plug for this component that use a library (LGPL). This library uses a data source which is GPL. Does this mean I have to free the source for my web app? or is it just necessary to release the source for the plug in? Thanks for any input and advice, and forgive me for my poor English. To be

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Learn more . Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow. Consider following steps: 0) Release open source Mock Program and Mock Plugin which communicate by certain interface (I), exchanging complex data structures, sharing memory and calling each other. Apply all-permissive license to it. 1) Release Plugin designed for working with any program in the way defined by interface (I). This plugin uses third-party GPL covered code and so is GPL itself. It is originally developed and

Microsoft creates their windows and MFC DLL library, etc. An open source develop write a new MFC application and release the source code as GPL. The app has to link with the MS DLL/libraries to run in Windows, but I don't think anyone can argue that we now have the right to force the Microsoft's GPL their DLL. Does this mean the GPL license is really depends on which one is "created" first? If proprietary library is created first (such as Windows DLLs) that is published without linking and any GPL code and later a GPL program is linked with it, then the GPL program can't convert the

I'm trying to figure out in which of these cases the legal ramifications of "Derivative work" come into play. When exactly is my code a derivative work ? A PHP framework released under the GPL. Isn't that GPL invalid since PHP has it's own license and you are using PHP to build that framework? A Commercial Wordpress theme? Isn't that a "Derivative work" and hence invalid because wordpress is GPL? A commercial class which is inserted into an existing GPL framework - yet does not include references to that framework inside that class. Is that a derivative work? You see, I originally thought that

If I use GPL software in my internal/closed source app do I have to make the source publicly available? say on the Internet? This question is specifically addressed in the GPL FAQ , and it says you're allowed to use GPLed software inside a company without legally distributing it. You have no obligation to release either source or binary outside the company. You're talking about what Richard Stallman (the person behind the Gnu movement) calls "private software". For private software, any license that allows you to use the code works, because you're not distributing it. Both the Free Software

I'm working on an open-source project that I want to release under a permissive license, because it's a library, not an application and personally, I don't like copyleft for library code. If I were to browse through GPL code written in a different programming language just to get a general idea of how to do something, and then write a different implementation of a similar or identical algorithm in the language I'm using, what would likely be the consequences? Would the copyleft owners have any legitimate complaints if my code was somewhat similar to, and clearly influenced by, theirs? How do

I have an application, it uses the libmysqlclient.so I wonder if I need GPL license on this application due to libmysqlclient be GPL or if I can continue the program in closed source EDIT: According to this site , I can use the libmysqlclient in a closed-source software. Just do not understand why the GPL "infects" the code so much ... EDIT2: If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean that any program which uses it has to be under the GPL or a GPL-compatible license? libmysqlclient, the JDBC connector, and other libraries to interfacing to MySQL are GPL (GPLv2).

I have a friend who has released code under the GPLv3 and CDDL licenses. I have also heard from someone else that these licenses conflict and invalidate each other. I was wondering if people had any opinion or idea of what that means for a user of this code. (Yes, I know, ask a lawyer; but I'm curious if people have any clues). The problem with dual licensing, either with two open source licenses or with one proprietary and one open source, is the issue of re-merging downstream changes. The other answers are correct. When you download something and it has two license you can choose which one