On 05/14/12 11:55, Paul Smith wrote: > > If we made our software link directly with libclamav, then, as far as I > can see we'd need to GPL our software, which isn't desirable
Yup. > What if another person made an AV plugin DLL to link our software with > libclamav? I presume that by doing so, their DLL would have to be > released under the GPL, but I also presume that wouldn't force us to GPL > our software even though our software is now linking with (their) GPL > software. Are they distributing this DLL to anyone? If not, it doesn't matter. If they are, they're bound by the GPL. If you link to it, you're bound by the GPL too. > What if WE made an AV plugin DLL to link our software with libclamav? http://www.clamav.net/doc/latest/html/node35.html > (At the moment we're thinking of making an AV plugin DLL which execs > clamdscan, which, AFAICS is totally 'safe' for our licensing, but it > would be much more efficient (on Windows) to have it link directly with > libclamav - we don't mind releasing the source to the AV plugin DLL - it > could be a useful example for our more technical customers) If you link to something that links to libclamav, you are bound by the GPL. Otherwise, it would be possible to insert a dummy layer in front of a GPL library and avoid the license. Using clamdscan or communicating directly with clamd over a socket is fine. (Or maybe you can buy a commercial license these days?) _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
