ביום ראשון 25 ינואר 2004, 12:03, נכתב על ידי Raditha Dissanayake:
> The Problem here is that mysql does not intepret GPL in the same way
> that the rest of the world does.
> I wrote to them asking for a client license and they insist i need to
> buy the server license and with it comes the client license. Do i need
> to buy a road so that i can drive a car?
That's licensing issue which has no bearing at all on GPL. to use a GPLed
product in a GPL compliant code you don't need any special license.
The only reason you'd need a different license then GPL is if you want to use
GPLed code in a product in a manner that does not comply with the GPL, in
which case the copyright holder can set any terms he or she likes - and it
doesn't have any effect on the GPL. MySQL can decide that in order to get a
license you'd need to send them a singing telegram, and that would be
perfectly OK - because you want a proprietary license.
If you want to use MySQL under the GPL license all you have to do is make sure
that your product complies with the GPL as I've written below. you do not
need any additional licenses from MySQL AB. AFAIU Kannel fully complies with
the GPL and so can link against MySQL libraries.
If OTOH you want to redistribute Kannel w/o source code (which the Kannel
license allows you to do), that also means you'd need to distrbute closed
source code that links with MySQL client code. this is specifically
disallowed by the GPL which means you'd need a special non-GPL license from
MySQL, at which point MySQL AB are allowed to require you to buy a server
license if they want to.
> Oded Arbel wrote:
> >???? ????? 21 ????? 2004, 16:18
> >
> >>all is the safest way. If the GPL avoiding solution is technical superior
> >>to the previous one (e.g. wider choice of DBMS), then this is even
> >> better.
> >
> >Sorry to barge in, but I think you all miss the point. IANAL, but I've
> > done some extendsive research into this and similar problems and
> > currently my official standing (and you can quote me, but again - I'm not
> > legally qualified to make such assertions so it's still your risk)
> > regarding GPL is that it allows you to combine GPL code with any open
> > source code using a "GPL compatible" license. that means as long as the
> > Kannel license it GPL compliant it should be ok to link it directly
> > against GPL code.
> >
> >GPL compatibility is cleary described in the GPL itself as any terms that
> > do not limit the freedom of the user any more GPL does. it is widely
> > accepted that a BSD Style and Apache Style licenses are less limiting
> > then the GPL and are hence GPL compatible.
> >
> >Also - as long as Kannel does not distribute mysql sources, and it can be
> >compiled against 3.x versions of MySQL as well as 4.x, and is compatible
> > with 3.x libraries (are those LGPL ?) then Kannel people should not worry
> > too much about it as the burden of license compatability lies with the
> > person who distributes binary packages and MySQL explicitly allows you to
> > use it in proprietry commercial environments under the GPL license as
> > long as it is not re-ditributed or advertised.
--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise mobile solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+972-9-9581711 (116)
+972-67-340014
::..
I'm desperately trying to figure out why kamikaze pilots wore helmets.
-- Dave Edison
