About Java and GPL: http://www.healthintersections.com.au/?p=1225
Grahame On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 7:31 AM, MURAKAMI, Keiko <[email protected]>wrote: > Thank you all, > > Our application are made by Java, > so these are not tightly linked GPL libraries, > because GPL libraries are located in another directory, > are referred or dynamic liked at live time. > And we never deliver the application to users, > we run the web application on our side servers, > all users just use our web service. > > I understood that license of our application covered under GPL, > but we need not give every source code to users. > > Keiko > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kuno Woudt > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 10:04 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Is Web application including GPL libraries > covered under GPL? > > On 12-05-13 08:08, MURAKAMI, Keiko wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > We've been developing an application on Eclipse Framework with > > libararies covered under LGPL, GPL and Apache licenses. > > These libraries are jxl.jar(LGPL), servlet-api.jar(GPL v2) and > > stepcounter(Apache) and so on. > > When we deliver our application just as Web application, by using but > > not distributing the libraries, should we distribute it under GPL? > > Should we be ready to show the complete source code to any user? > > The application is not static linked. > > Depending on who you ask, linking to servlet-api.jar means you need to > license your web application under the GPL. If you run this web > application > on your own servers and users connect to it, you would not be obligated to > give those users the source code, because you are not distributing the web > application to them -- you are merely providing a service. > > If your application makes use of non-trivial chunks of javascript, then be > aware that you are distributing that code to your users. If that > javascript > is tightly interwoven with the rest of your web application so as to form a > single creative work, I would argue that you ARE distributing parts of your > web application to your users and should therefore comply with the > conditions of the GPL -- and make the full source code available to those > users. > > I am not a lawyer. I am also not aware of any cases which would provide > some guidance on when client-side and server-side code are sufficiently > entangled to be considered a single creative work. > > -- warp. > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > -- ----- http://www.healthintersections.com.au / [email protected]/ +61 411 867 065
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
