7

I'm using LGPL binaries, as well as EPL binaries for my open source project. Is this OK? And if yes, does that mean I should license my project under LGPL?

The binaries are being used as dependencies for the project i.e. I'm just using them as-is without making changes to them.

  • 3
    You're going to need to add more details for this to be sensibly answered. How are you using said binaries? – ArtOfCode Feb 11 '16 at 10:30
  • OK, added more details. Do tell me more clarification is necessary. – peco Feb 11 '16 at 11:00
  • 1
    Have you modified the sources or the binaries of the other projects? – Zizouz212 Feb 12 '16 at 12:15
  • I didn't make any changes to the sources of the binaries. – peco Feb 12 '16 at 14:13
  • 1
    @cat Nice of you to add the bounty. However, I think the main reason why there aren't any answers here is primarily due to the lack of information (which is probably our fault as well for not asking questions...). Do you share the same situation here? I'm debating writing a canonical answer here when I find the time. – Zizouz212 Apr 12 '16 at 17:47
1

I'm using LGPL binaries, as well as EPL binaries for my open source project. Is this OK?

Yes.

And if yes, does that mean I should license my project under LGPL? The binaries are being used as dependencies for the project i.e. I'm just using them as-is without making changes to them.

No: this is common for Java-based project to depend and re-use as-is pre-built packages (typically provisioned through Maven) that are under the EPL or the LGPL. The EPL or LGPL does not extend to your own code in this case.

And if you redistribute these dependencies, as long as you are respecting the terms of the licenses of these deps, this typically does not impact the license you can use in your own code.

The simple way to respect the terms would be to do this for each dep:

  • include all licenses and notices (or create them if they are missing), include some doc to give credit and display these licenses and notices.
  • provide the corresponding source code for these deps

This may be more than needed in some cases (for instance unmodified redistribution of EPL-licensed code does not require exactly source code redistribution) but this is simple and easier to apply (and automate) and ensure a decent compliance across the board.

You could also apply the same approach to other packages.

  • What do you mean by "redistribute these dependencies"? – peco May 24 '16 at 9:53
  • @peco you have two ways to use dependent libraries in Java assuming you are using Maven and a typical approach: 1. You distribute only your own code with a pom and instructions to run Maven or ivy or else to fetch the dependencies remotely at install time. 2. You distribute your own code and the dependent jars bundled together – Philippe Ombredanne May 24 '16 at 10:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.