Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have an application (or library) with an Lesser GPL v3 license. I'd like to use (and publish it with) an ISCL licensed library. Would this be ok?
Thanks!
ISC is compatible to GPL (and as such, LGPL).
The ISC license is quite simple:
Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any
purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.
(from wikipedia)
It doesn't forbid you to sub-license the code or redistribute it under another license. You can thus redistribute along LGPL licensed work, as long as you make sure to preserve the original copyright note.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Suppose I am releasing software under the A License. The software uses an external library licensed under the B license.
Can I put both licenses, A and B, together in a single file called LICENSE?
No you cannot.
From GNU web site:
If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
that any software which uses it has to be under the GPL or a
GPL-compatible license? (#IfLibraryIsGPL)
Yes, because the software as it is actually run includes the library.
Source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL
Libraries are usually released under LGPL instead of GPL because of this restriction. If you include a GPL'ed library, or even a piece of GPL'ed source code in your software, you will need to release your software under GPL.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
i have library that is licensed under zlib/libpng and i what to use it in my commercial application?
without open my application source , can i ?
i will dynamically link to it
Yes we can!
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/zlib-license.php
This software is provided 'as-is',
without any express or implied
warranty. In no event will the authors
be held liable for any damages arising
from the use of this software.
Permission is granted to anyone to use
this software for any purpose,
including commercial applications, and
to alter it and redistribute it
freely, subject to the following
restrictions:
The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not
claim that you wrote the original
software. If you use this software in
a product, an acknowledgment in the
product documentation would be
appreciated but is not required.
Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
be misrepresented as being the
original software.
This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Is it possible to use ObjectListView, which uses the GPL v3 license, legally in a closed-source program that will be sold?
If so, what has to be done to make sure to not violate the license?
ObjectListView has a GPL license so that it is usable by all free software.
Commercial licenses are available, with payment being related to the size of the organisation that wants the licenses.
If you cannot afford any license, we can still work something out. I've never denied a commercial license to anyone who wanted one.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
How would one follow the proper steps in order to license a "package" under the terms of Artistic License 2, as published by the Perl Foundation.
Is there a guide, such as GNU's GPL how-to that I'm missing?
I've only found CPAN's Licensing Guide, I believe it would apply for external use too, wouldn't it?
Otherwise, I presume adding a notice at the start of each source code file, and including a copy of the license itself with the distribution would do the trick.
Still, since licensing is quite an important issue, I'd like to hear any views on this.
Before I start, I must warn you I'm not a lawyer.
As far as I know, the way you communicate the license to others is not dependent on any specific license. If you're the sole author of the work, you hold the copyright and have the exclusive rights to decide what is allowed with respect to distribution, modification etc. You can communicate your decision through a well known licence to help potential users of your work understand the terms of usage.
From a practical view, adding a copyright notice to the distribution & copyright headers pointing to that notice to source files should be enough. Also, the licence should be clearly mentioned on the site where you provide download of the distribution.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm setting up a new project and I want to choose a license that is as limiting as possible while still being open source.
Apache License 2.0
Artistic License/GPL
Eclipse Public License 1.0
GNU General Public License v2
GNU General Public License v3
GNU Lesser General Public License
MIT License
Mozilla Public License 1.1
New BSD License
AGPL .. the most restrictive one
This really depends on what you mean by 'restrictive.' If you mean, which one make it hardest to use free code in your proprietary application without giving credit to the authors of the code - its the GPL. The opposite of that would be the BSD license. However, I like that license because it makes it harder for people to use my hard work for free without contributing derivative works back to the world. It's free as in 'free speech' - not free beer. So, if you are looking for free beer, stay away from GPL code.