Gpl?

matrim

Does anyone here know about the how the licensing in GPL works regarding using a library that is GPL but not actually changing the code?

I want to use libraries (MySql .Net connector and possibly unixOdbc), which are both licenced under the GPL. However for various reasons my code has to be closed source.

Does this break the GPL licensing if I use the library without change but don't license my own code as GPL?

henbane

I'm not up on v3 yet but using GPL libraries with closed source code hasn't been a problem before.

lynchie

Its not a problem using gpl software in closed source application, but if u sell them you must include the licenses for each gpl app / library with your application. If you modify the source code of the gpl application, AFAIK, you must publish the changes made to it with your app.. not entirely 100% sure on the last part.

aidan_walsh

IIRC, if you us a GPL2 library you have to supply the library source to others if they request it from you, even via mail if necessary. I don't believe that its enough to simply tell them where you got it.

But then its been a while since I checked...

MeWantBroadband

1. If this is for work and/or financially important, do not rely on advice from SomeRandomGuyOnTheInternet (tm), including me.

2. Some of the previous posts in this thread make the case for #1 above

3. Feel free to get legal advice, but failing that, the GPL v.2 is quite distinctive in comparison to other software licences, in that it is actually written in reasonably clear English. Have a read of it, and read the FAQs on the FSF site.

4. There are two GPLs: GPL and the LGPL. The latter allows it to be linked to from other code without requiring that other code to be distributed under the LGPL. However, the GPL is more widely used and is not so amenable to commercial closed source software distribution.

5. I think the problem with MySQL is that it uses the full GPL which is their way of getting commercial software vendors to buy a commercial version from them (which is fair enough).

5. People in this thread are mixing the LGPL and GPL up.

5. With GPL code, if you are using it with your own code and then distributing that to other people, you are obliged to give (or make available) those people the entire source under the GPL license.

ressem

Mysql themselves have a stricter view on these things.

If you include one or more of the MySQL drivers in your non-GPL application (so that your application can run with MySQL), you need a commercial license for the driver(s) in question.

http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/commercial-license.html

Essentially their view is that if your commercially sold program will not run without a mysql server, then you need a mysql commercial license of some sort. They changed the client licenses from lesser-gpl to gpl years back to reinforce this view.

henbane

MeWantBroadband wrote:

1. If this is for work and/or financially important, do not rely on advice from SomeRandomGuyOnTheInternet (tm), including me.

2. Some of the previous posts in this thread make the case for #1 above

Very true