This question already has an answer here:

I am confused about how compiled executables are licensed vs the source code that built it. I'm in the situation where I am creating a Docker image of my application. My application itself and the Dockerfile that creates the image I have licensed using MIT (and the source code is freely available). But what about the compiled image?

Once the Docker image is created (and hosted on dockerhub for example), it contains a lot of GPL binaries like the Linux Kernel and Bash. Does that mean that the resulting image is GPL? And then wouldnt it follow that all Docker images or virtual images or Linux CDs/DVDs would have to be GPL? Or am I reading the GPL incorrectly. Does this come down to differentiating between bundling and linking?

My goal is to keep my project MIT licensed, not GPL.

marked as duplicate by Zimm i48, Mureinik, RubberDuck, MadHatter, curiousdannii Feb 21 '17 at 9:51

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Thanks. Yes, I agree this is a dupe. I meant to close it earlier. – Jono Feb 21 '17 at 19:13

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.