Bleh, I quote the original comment I objected to: "> ... Just because a XUL motor, for example, is GPL, doesn't mean that applications written on it have to be.
"I disagree. A GPL is very restrictive. It only allows applications to be built that are themselves open source." I agree with most of your comments below. But libraries are entirely different to motors (Interpreters). Your original comment was wrong. My distinction is anything but tenuous and quite clearly supported by the GPL faq. The _relevant_ bit, that is. #IfInterpreterIsGPL. - Charlie On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 20:57 -0400, Marc Clifton wrote: > Hi Arron, > > Thank you for shedding light on the matter. > > I think the distinction that Charles is trying to make is tenuous, on the semantics > of "based on" vs. "using a". With regards to MyXaml (my narrow perspective), it's > rather confusing: > > 1. The loader (GPL'd) can be used to instantiate your own assemblies. Can those > assemblies be provided as closed source? I would say yes if I were using Charles' > "using" criteria. > > 2. The library (myxaml.dll) is GPL, not LGPL. Therefore, it fits under the > criteria of the link you provided. Therefore, an application that "uses" (hmm, here > we have the same word!) the library must also be open source. > > The only distinction, tenuous at that, is that in the first case, the loader is not > a library. It is an EXE. But the loader "uses" the library. Therefore the loader > must be GPL'd. And since, most likely (I can't think of case where this wouldn't > happen, except really simple applications), the plug-in assembly ends up "using" the > GPL'd library, it also must be GPL'd, unless there is a license exclusion. > > And, of course, it gets even more complicated, because when we come out with a > commercial design tool, that needs to include a licensed version of the library that > allows you to build closed source applications with it. > > I can see why there's a confusion as to how Linux applications can actually be > closed source, because from one perspective, you can view Linux as a giant library. > Or at least, at some level, your application is interfacing to functions in a GPL'd > library. I can see why the lawyers are busy. But a lawyer will always try to prove > a case from the point of view of his client, not from the point of view of what is > actually right. To solve the problem, the licensing terms need to spell out the > exact conditions for each of the possible use cases. That's what I will need to do > with MyXaml. > > How have the other XUL authors resolved these complexities (or have they)? > > Marc > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arron Ferguson > Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 8:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [xul-talk] Because victory wasn't achievable to begin with > > Both of you, > > Please read this: > > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL > > > </flame-match status="end"> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ----- > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Charles Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: 04/11/2004 05:12PM > Subject: RE: [xul-talk] Because victory wasn't achievable to begin with > > On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 19:59 -0400, Marc Clifton wrote: > > Sigh. > > > > >From the GPL: > > > > " 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it > > At what part of that does it apply to developing an XUL application on > top of an XUL motor? An XUL application is not work based on an XUL > motor, but work using an XUL motor. If you read the small print you'll > see there is a difference. > > The GPL license of an XUL motor implies nothing to the license of the > XUL application in the same way that just because you write an > application that runs on Linux you do not have to GPL said application. > > Wake up. You're in a land of noo naa. Emailing in your sleep. > > > And frankly, I consider myself a lot more intelligent than most lawyers > > You may be intelligent but you do not understand the GPL. > > But, hey, you think I'm a moron. Fine... email RMS stating your legal > opinion on how the GPL affects applications. He'll personally set you > straight on the matter. > -- > - Charlie > > Charles Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Online @ www.charlietech.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > xul-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xul-talkNÂHS^ÂÃÅÅXÂÂÅ'ÂÅÃuÂËÃÃÅÃSÂÃ+âÂlÂÅ.)ÃÃÃÂÂÂÅâÅÃÂÃÃyÃà > ÂÃzThmÂÂÂÃÃÂ'^ÅÃÂt! > ÂÃÅÂ:(ÂÃ!Åâhâ'Â-ÃÂÂÃÃÂ+aÅxÂâÅÂwZâÃÃj[-ÂÃÂÂÃÅvhÂÅÃkjÃÂÅmÂÃÃvÃ,vw(âÃÂâÃÃÂâZâà > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id70&alloc_id638&op=click > _______________________________________________ > xul-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xul-talk > -- - Charlie Charles Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Online @ www.charlietech.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ xul-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xul-talk
