Mike Steglich asked: > Is it permitted to have a program licensed under GPLv3 and an EPL software
> in one binary distribution? There is no share of source code ore use of a library. > The GPL binary executes the EPL binary as an external process (as a command > line tool). Mike Milinkovich replied: > The answer, as always, is "it depends". Have you read [1] and [2]? > They capture the basic positions of both the FSF and the Eclipse Foundation. > However, they do focus primarily on the plug-in scenario. > > [1] http://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/epl-gpl-commentary/ > [2] http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/using-the-gpl-for-eclipse-plug-ins For the record, and even though you've heard this from me before, I'll say again that the analysis in the FSF FAQ is wrong. There is no copyright or GPL license restriction on combining GPL and any other open source or proprietary software by functional linking *as long as one does not thereby create a derivative work*. Derivative work analysis in copyright cases is admittedly complicated. There have been several excellent articles in the International Free and Open Source Software Law Review (http://www.ifosslr.org/ifosslr) that address this topic far better than anything you'll read in the FSF FAQ. A combined GPL and EPL work is typically released as one single binary for functional purposes only and the combination has nothing to do with the expressive nature of their source code. As far as I am aware, derivative work analysis in copyright law explicitly excludes the functional aspects of the works in question. I would appreciate hearing any legal citations to the contrary. Clearing up this FUD would allow us to answer Mike Steglich and others in the FOSS community simply: Be free to combine GPL and EPL and any other non-GPL software in one binary or source code distribution. Just don't distribute derivative works of the GPL software except under the GPL. /Larry Lawrence Rosen Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com) 3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:03 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [License-discuss] GPL and non-GPL binaries in one distribution Mike, The answer, as always, is "it depends". Have you read [1] and [2]? They capture the basic positions of both the FSF and the Eclipse Foundation. However, they do focus primarily on the plug-in scenario. [1] http://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/epl-gpl-commentary/ [2] http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/using-the-gpl-for-eclipse-plug-ins From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Steglich Sent: January-12-12 10:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [License-discuss] GPL and non-GPL binaries in one distribution Hi, Is it permitted to have a program licensed under GPLv3 and an EPL software in one binary distribution? There is no share of source code ore use of a library. The GPL binary executes the EPL binary as an external process (as a command line tool). I interpret that as an aggregate: A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an "aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate. Am I right or not? Thanks Mike
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
