On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:03:35PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote: > Basically, since we are _not_ modifying source to any software, I had > always thought that this is a slam-dunk. However, once I read that > MySQL page, I have doubts. Am I misinterpreting it?
You should be aware that that page misuses the word "commercial". Apparently they divide the world into "GPL" and "commercial", and define "commercial" as: your application is not licensed under GPL or compatible OSI license approved by MySQL AB. This is different from how the rest of the world uses the word "commercial". The MySQL page probably assumes that the FSF position is correct, which is that an application that links to a GPLed library is a derived work of that library. They also seem to be claiming that simply using a GPL-compatible license isn't enough; you have to get it approved by MySQL AB too. That part goes farther than the FSF does. If you're dealing with the MySQL libraries specifically, then your options are probably to either take them at their word or ask a copyright lawyer. Richard Braakman
