44
votes
Accepted
If I can't provide GPL source because a supplier did not provide it, am I at fault?
To add a little to planetmaker's excellent answer: I'm not entirely sure what loophole you think you've discovered, but assuming your contention is that you're released from your obligation to ...
- 47k
41
votes
Accepted
Can I make my own license?
Don't do this. We already have an excellent Q&A on why you shouldn't use a crayon licence, and I strongly recommend you read it. You can achieve most of what you want with existing licences, and ...
- 47k
33
votes
Accepted
Contributor asking to remove their contributions
it didn’t make it clear for this situation whether the contributor had copyright over their work
That's because it doesn't need to be made clear - contributors always own the copyright on their work, ...
- 18.5k
31
votes
Does license prohibition of illicit / malicious use or modification clash with GPL's freedom to modify?
Simply put, a requirement to seek outside approval in order to make or deploy changes is not GPL-compatible, nor is it even a requirement within the definitions of free and open-source software.
Part ...
- 35.6k
29
votes
If I can't provide GPL source because a supplier did not provide it, am I at fault?
That's a legal question, not an open-source one; the answer depends on jurisdiction and on how you fight legal battles. However in short, you are both, victim and offender.
You distribute the software,...
- 10.8k
26
votes
Does license prohibition of illicit / malicious use or modification clash with GPL's freedom to modify?
You are approaching this the wrong way.
First, you are assuming any wish to modify the software will be malicious, while in reality people will want to make all kinds of changes you hadn't anticipated ...
- 781
25
votes
Accepted
Do I Need to Publish my Source Code because of LGPL?
7-zip is principally published under LGPLv2+, with an additional restriction relating to reimplementing the rar algorithm. As I read it, this additional restriction comes nowhere near affecting your ...
- 47k
23
votes
Can I sell a proprietary software with an LGPL library bundled along with it, without making my source code public?
Yes, you can distribute your software without making the source code public and without giving recipients the right to make changes to your software.
The LGPL license explicitly allows such usages of ...
20
votes
Extracting business logic from a LGPL v3 project and rewriting my own, is my work considered derivative?
In theory, no - the copyright exists in the specific implementation of the code, not the algorithm in use.
In practice, it's going to be very hard for you to forget everything you've read in the LGPL ...
- 18.5k
19
votes
Accepted
Can I sell a proprietary software with an LGPL library bundled along with it, without making my source code public?
You've already got the answer that LGPL libraries can be used in commercial software. So far, so good. There's more to this than meets the eye, though.
The thing is, PySide2 is for using the Qt ...
- 306
17
votes
Accepted
Own LGPL code in proprietorial project
As the owner of the copyright, you can do what you want with your code.
It is others who are bound by the licence(s) under which you distribute the code, because they accept those licences when they ...
- 47k
17
votes
Accepted
Can I have a GPL-compatible license that change by use?
Yes you can create your own license that delegates to the GPL/LGPL as appropriate. However, this will not work as intended.
The Free Software / Open Source (FOSS) community thinks that discriminating ...
- 38.6k
17
votes
Accepted
Can the GNU LGPL be removed from a piece of software?
Interesting one.
Assuming the publisher is the sole rightsholder, yes, they are perfectly free to relicense the work; however, they can't revoke the licence on existing copies that are already out ...
- 47k
16
votes
Accepted
How to prevent contributors from claiming copyright on my LGPL-released software?
This is a legitimate issue that's come up various times in the past on various open source projects. The way it's typically handled is by not accepting external contributions into your repository ...
- 344
15
votes
If I can't provide GPL source because a supplier did not provide it, am I at fault?
Here's a comprehensive answer from https://copyleft.org with some added emphasis:
With ever-increasing frequency, software development (particularly for embedded devices) is outsourced to third ...
- 1,970
14
votes
How to prevent contributors from claiming copyright on my LGPL-released software?
We have run into this problem in libpng. We addressed it by putting any contributions that insist on keeping their own copyright, or are under a different open source license, into a "contrib" ...
- 3,911
13
votes
Accepted
Can GPLv2 licensed software be re-published under LGPLv2.1?
I do not think you are reading the compatibility table correctly. When I look at the intersection of I want to copy code under GPLv2 and I want to licence my code under LGPLv2.1 I see a box that says ...
- 47k
12
votes
Can I make my own license?
If you are an Operating System Developer, you can also choose Apache.
I'm an operating system developer. If I use your software, I will choose Apache.
The problem is that one of the rights that I ...
- 589
11
votes
Using GPL or LGPL licensed framework for web application
Running an application on a server is never considered distribution, and you're not bound by the terms of the LGPL for distribution.
Please do note that running javascript in the browser does mean ...
- 9,286
11
votes
Bypass LGPL license using wrapper library
I assume by "commercial project" you mean that you do not wish to disclose the source code for the product you are developing. Please correct me if my understanding is incorrect, as it is the basis of ...
- 1,894
11
votes
Accepted
Is Apple allowed to distribute GPLv3-licensed software through its iOS App Store?
I have no intention of trying to argue with rms about this (or any other GPL-related) issue. But I think there's an interesting difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 that gives rise to a new line of ...
- 47k
11
votes
LGPL obligations implementation in beta versions
Compliance stuff isn't a nice-to-have feature. The LGPL provides no exceptions for beta releases. However, the LGPL is technology-neutral and does not directly require you to implement a GUI.
You must ...
- 38.6k
11
votes
Does license prohibition of illicit / malicious use or modification clash with GPL's freedom to modify?
Modifications are still possible, as long as they go through the official channel and are verified to be fully compliant by the community.
This would make the software definitely not open source as ...
- 18.5k
10
votes
Do I need to provide build/install instructions for LGPL-2.1 or AGPL-3.0 licensed libraries?
However I think only AGPL-3.0 requires build/install instructions according to the following links.[...] [and not the LGPL-2.1]
Am I right?
Nope.
These links are not the license proper. Just ...
- 14.3k
10
votes
Accepted
GPL for Embedded
First of all, you may want to discuss GPL compliance with your company's legal counsel and develop a clear strategy for dealing with GPL code. Complying with the GPL is not necessarily difficult, but ...
- 38.6k
10
votes
Is Apple allowed to distribute GPLv3-licensed software through its iOS App Store?
I emailed Mr. Richard Stallman, the primary author of the GPL, for his opinion on this issue. I received the following reply:
I studied this question for a while. It is clear that that matter of ...
- 457
10
votes
Accepted
Is LGPLv3 against tivoization? Or only GPLv3?
The LGPLv3 license is an extension of the GPLv3 license that grants certain additional permissions (like using the code together with proprietary, undisclosed code).
The clause 4e you quoted just ...
10
votes
Does license prohibition of illicit / malicious use or modification clash with GPL's freedom to modify?
If I received GPL licensed software and pass it to someone else, that is copyright infringement unless I follow the GPL license conditions. Telling the receiver they cannot use the software for ...
- 1,265
9
votes
Own LGPL code in proprietorial project
Your code is your own, you can use it in closed products while giving away copies under e.g. LGPL. Just be clear that if I take your code and modify it under LGPL (e.g. to fix bugs) you are not ...
- 5,217
9
votes
Accepted
Am I allowed to make use of parts of the codebase of a library that is licensed under LGPL (v2.1)
The license terms of the LGPL license effectively distinguish two different models:
You make changes to the LGPL code, or you copy portions of the LGPL licensed code into your own project. In this ...
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible