Hi Mike,
On Aug 06, 2004, at 18:08, mos wrote:
This means that, according to the most common interpretation of the GPL, just linking with them automatically requires your code be under the GPL.
License: >>The GPL license is contagious in the sense that when a program is linked to a GPL program, all the source code for all the parts of the resulting product must also be released under the GPL. <<
One important note here: The GPL does not behave in the way described above. There is no requirement to distribute software that you build with or on top of GPL-licensed software to others.
However, if you choose to distribute software that is a derivative work (defined in US copyright law as " A ''derivative work'' is a work based upon one or more preexisting works") of GPL-licensed software, then the software can only be distributed under the GPL.
So what if the client app doesn't require the MySql client libraries in order to access the MySQL database? My client application requires no dll's at all, because everything is compiled inside an .exe file. That's because I'm using a 3rd party set of components that bypasses the libmysql*.dll libraries altogether. My application doesn't link to MySQL's code, GPL or otherwise. Does this now make my application license free even if I distribute it for $$$? Or will the software police come banging on my door at 4 AM looking for me?
This architecture might bypass the requirements of the GPL - I don't really know. The best course of action here is to consult a lawyer who is an expert in Free Software/Open Source software licensing who can advise you of the validity of your course of action for your given situation.
We would probably assert that the software forms a derivative work with GPL-licensed MySQL because the software would likely not function without MySQL. However, this is a tough area to speculate on.
As we are not lawyers (nor are we in the business of giving free legal advice to help people circumvent our own business model :), we always recommend that proprietary applications (aka applications that do not share their source code and the rights to modify it with others) should always use the proprietarily licensed version of MySQL. This recommendation ensures that our licensing terms are never violated and helps us generate revenue to fund development of the database. Usually, people who distribute proprietary applications are selling them. We feel that it is reasonable to charge users who wish to charge their users and who do not give their users the freedom to view, modify and share the source of the application.
We also suggest that people consider putting their software under a Free Software/Open Source license (such as the GPL, the BSD license, the Apache license and so on). Then they can use MySQL for free. This model may not work for everyone, but there is still significant potential for revenue with the model by selling the application at a fee that the market finds reasonable, along with related services like hosting, support, consulting, etc.
People may also want to consider using a dual-licensing model that allows them to share with others who choose to use Open Source/Free Software licenses, but gives them a revenue stream from people who prefer traditional proprietary licenses.
Cheers! -- Zak Greant MySQL AB Community Advocate
-- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
