Skip to main content
10 votes
Accepted

GPL exceptions that only apply to certain individuals

This is probably not in compliance with the Debian Free Software Guidelines or the Open Source Definition, both of which prohibit discrimination against persons or groups. However, your case is ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
8 votes

Maintaining open- and closed-source versions of same code

The customer don't mind me to open-source this code, but they would like the code to be available for use only in open-source projects, but not in commercial projects. This triggers me that it seems ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
8 votes
Accepted

How does the OCaml LGPL Linking Exception differ from using a non-copyleft license?

The main difference with using a permissive license, and also an advantage if you choose LGPL+linking exception, is that changes to the library (the OCaml Core System in this case) cannot be made ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
7 votes

How is Oracle suing Google for copyright infringement when Java is Open Source?

To review, the issue here is that Google used the structure of the Java API when implementing their own software. The appeals court found that the structure of an API is eligible for copyright ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
6 votes
Accepted

Maintaining open- and closed-source versions of same code

Bart's excellent answer covers most of the points I'd have made, but you do ask about contributions, and I think that's worth addressing as well. That issue rather hinges on whether you see the ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
5 votes
Accepted

Can GPL with linking exception be linked with GPL and non-GPL simultaneously?

The GPL with some linking exception is still just the GPL, but with extra permissions. These extra permissions only apply to a specific module, and they do not extend to other modules that are only ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
5 votes
Accepted

Should I exclude files from the license if they reference other copyrighted work

In this scenario, it's not a good idea. It doesn't make sense to add exclusions because I need the entire project to be under FOSS terms, not just parts of it. By making exceptions, it just creates ...
Seth Falco's user avatar
5 votes
Accepted

Can I create my own exception to the Apache license? Is it good practice?

It won't work. If Bob takes your software and incorporates some code from third-party package C, which is under (eg) GPLv2, then although your exception allows Bob to relicense your code to GPLv2, ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
4 votes

Maintaining open- and closed-source versions of same code

Copyright owners aren't bound by their own licensing terms. If your customer owns the copyright to the code (as you suggested in a comment they would), then they can license it under the GPL, and ...
benrg's user avatar
  • 235
4 votes
Accepted

CLA as an exception to the GPL

A CLA as a GPL extension may be possible, but provides no particular advantages. This answer will only discuss GPLv3, as it includes an explicit mechanism for additional terms. GPLv3 additional ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
3 votes
Accepted

Subclassing, Unity, and the LGPL

Regarding your second option, the LGPLv3 is created by using the "Additional Permission" option from the GPLv3. This means that the clauses from the GPLv3 also apply to the LGPLv3 (except where the ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
3 votes
Accepted

License of code generated by a code generator

As no (copyrightable) part of the generator makes it into the output, the license on the generator code does not affect the license of the output in any way. The license on the templates is a ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes

How can I denote content not covered under Creative Commons?

In both examples you give, the best option is to clearly describe what part is under which license at the point where you give the various licenses that are applicable to the work. In a book, there ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes

License of code generated by a code generator

Would it be possible to release the generator's source code (generator logic + templates) under say GPLv3 without having the generated code to be GPLv3 licensed too? Yes of course. But this is a ...
Basile Starynkevitch's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

Is there a specific header used to indicate that a file is exempt from the licensing of the rest of the project?

There are a few options you can use for code of your program that gets copied into the output: You can license that code under a different, GPL-compatible, license. This would then typically be a ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes

Proprietary resources in GPLv3 project

I would suggest designing the software so as to allow a user to supply a set of icons, and include with it a set of functional (but not necessarily attractive) icons that you would allow to be freely ...
supercat's user avatar
  • 187
2 votes
Accepted

Proprietary resources in GPLv3 project

There would be an official distribution (build) of software using icons with permission for private use without redistribution license, but one could build their own fork or build of software, but ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes

Proprietary resources in GPLv3 project

Yes, such thing is possible - how exactly depends on a few conditions: If you are the sole owner of copyright, you can do as you want anyway and you need to exercise little care on how you bundle and ...
planetmaker's user avatar
  • 11.2k
2 votes
Accepted

Can I mix GPL code with assets modified under different licenses?

The AGPL does not allow this for what copyright law considers to be a single work. If any part of the work is licensed under the AGPL, then the AGPL requires that the entire work is distributed under ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

Granting exceptions to the GPL so that binary is compatible with 3rd party license

Can I, however, distribute bar under a license that says something along the lines of "Bar is distributed under the GPLv3, with the following exception: a non-source form of this work is under ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
1 vote

GPL exceptions that only apply to certain individuals

It will be more like having two licenses. One that you grant only to a specific group of people.
Alberto Salvia Novella's user avatar
1 vote
Accepted

Indirectly distributed AGPL with FOSS exception compliance

The AGPL requires source-sharing only when someone interacts with a service that is based on AGPL-licensed code (or, when you physically distribute work that includes AGPL-licensed code). If no end ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
1 vote

GPL exceptions that only apply to certain individuals

That would not be a Free license - discrimination against (or FOR) persons, groups, or field of work means it is non-free. What you can do - if the code is all yours - is to dual license it. Post it ...
ivanivan's user avatar
  • 1,015
1 vote

Does GNU Classpath exception allow me to take parts of the library, link with them and distribute the resulting executable on my terms?

What if I don't need the whole library code? Am I allowed to take only parts of the library (only some functions), compile those parts into a separate module and then link my code to that separate ...
Philippe Ombredanne's user avatar

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