Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
isaccepted:yes
hasaccepted:no
inquestion:1234
Views views:250
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Favorites infavorites:mine
infavorites:1234
Status closed:yes
duplicate:no
migrated:no
wiki:no
Types is:question
is:answer
Exclude -[tag]
-apples
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with Search options user 8434

Questions about the GNU General Public License

6
votes
GPL does not restrict usage in any way. Even making money is OK. Only further distribution is subject to the license terms. …
answered Jan 15 '13 by MSalters
0
votes
The GPL primarily puts obligations on persons redistributing your code. You can't sue yourself for breaching the GPL anyway, so what you do with your own code is your own decision. Now, whether you … need to redistribute source code for those libraries depends on their licenses, not yours. You may be able to rely on subsection 6c in case they use (L)GPL 3: "Convey individual copies of the object …
answered Dec 18 '14 by MSalters
3
votes
Your explanation ends up proving the following: A <-----> C | | V B That is to say, B is derived from both A and C. Your rights are given in the intersection both both licenses, …
answered Aug 8 '13 by MSalters
0
votes
Yes, this violates the license. The SDK doesn't spell out the GPL by name, but there's no doubt that the GPL is one of those Excluded Licenses. Hence, the SDK specifically bans you from distributing … Distributable Code [incl. the icons] as part of your GPL application. As you have no other right to do so, regular copyright law kicks in and forbids you to distribute those icons. As the original …
answered Dec 18 '14 by MSalters
2
votes
What does he mean, "cannot be resold"? There are two interpretations, an economical one and a legal one. Under the legal interpretation, if your software is under the GPL license, other people are … explicitly allowed to resell your software. Under the economical interpretation, if you offer a free-as-in-beer GPL version on your website, other people cannot resell your software because they'd …
answered Sep 16 '11 by MSalters
3
votes
Yes. The other answers use far too much text explaining opinions on whether you should or not, but those opinions are not that relevant to the question. The fact is that you will have a new work on …
answered Oct 20 '14 by MSalters
0
votes
You avoid a GPL violation by simply adhering to the GPL license terms. From what you describe (your source is available, license terms are still GPLv2, source acknowledged) you've done enough. You … violation of the GPL. It's in fact the norm for forks of OSS projects, and might be required under trademark law. …
answered Feb 5 '13 by MSalters
53
votes
It's technically legal. The MIT (Expat) license places a few restrictions on you. These are a subset of the GPL license. Therefore, if you relicense the code under the GPL, and keep the MIT notice … originally have. In the case of the GPL, I am explicitly forbidden to sublicense only some rights. But neither in law nor in the MIT license do I have an obligation to sublicense all rights as a whole …
answered Sep 5 '11 by MSalters
2
votes
As the link in the comments shows, this is borderline acceptable. It can be made safe by a cleanroom approach: make a specification, listing every idea and feature that you will copy. Your new code wi …
answered Jul 17 '13 by MSalters
1
vote
. I wouldn't have written that code if I wasn't paid for it. So yes, you can use Open Source components in commercial software, and yes, with GPL that software then has to be GPL as well. …
answered Oct 28 '14 by MSalters
3
votes
TL;DR: The FSF doesn't make a distinction between process and program, suggesting restrictions on your program which only apply to the resulting process. The GPL works fundamentally via copyright … . In particular, it's a distribution license (doesn't cover use) and is limited to works that are placed under the GPL. Now one of the problems is when a work starts falling under the GPL, and what …
answered Mar 11 '14 by MSalters
3
votes
Yes. GPL covers distribution/conveyance only. As your other comment suggests, you want to restrict your users. It doesn't matter that the script is sent over a network. Conveyance (the GPL defined …
answered Sep 10 '13 by MSalters