Everyone,
I very much appreciate this discussion, and it's nice to see no one
getting heated up about this topic. Still, I would suggest we leave it
at the references to the FSF and their legal advice at this point, we
probably can't add much more to this discussion without starting to go
into dif
Hi Forest,
I'm pretty sure it's not quite like that:
It does exchange data structures and calls into GR/gets called from GR,
so it needs a GPLv3-compatible license, but not necessarily the GPLv3
itself.
In essence, fully agree with Sylvain's POV.
Cheers,
Marcus
On 17.07.2016 21:32, Forest Cros
Jan,
If your OOT module uses GNU Radio data structures or function calls
(i.e., the API), then it can only be distributed under the GPL. This
is because the work is "based on" GNU Radio[1]. Since a work "based
on" a GPL'd work can only be distributed under the same license[2],
your OOT module woul
Hey everyone,
thanks for your answers guys, I think you clarified pretty much everything.
Now all I can do is wait for an answer from management.
Cheers,
Jan
2016-07-07 19:02 GMT+02:00 Martin Braun :
> Jan,
>
> also, don't forget, code you write is yours. You can even have multiple
> licenses f
Jan,
also, don't forget, code you write is yours. You can even have multiple
licenses for the same code (at least for modules and parts that don't
use GNU Radio or other GPL'd libraries).
Cheers,
Martin
On 07/07/2016 06:18 AM, Jan Krämer wrote:
> Thanks Michael, now fingers crossed that I am all
Hi Jan -
If you have any further questions regarding licenses as they pertain to GNU
Radio, feel free to e-mail me directly. I'm happy to answer questions &
help.
Thanks to Sylvain and MLD for providing great answers!
Cheers,
Ben
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Jan Krämer wrote:
> Thanks Mich
Thanks Michael, now fingers crossed that I am allowed to publish the code
under one of those licenses.
Cheers,
Jan
2016-07-07 12:18 GMT+02:00 Michael Dickens :
> What Sylvain wrote is correct: if you publish your GR OOT module, then you
> have to choose GPLv3 or a compatible FOSS license. I beli
What Sylvain wrote is correct: if you publish your GR OOT module, then
you have to choose GPLv3 or a compatible FOSS license. I believe that by
default the license is GPLv3, since that's what GR is. See also <
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > for a list of compatible
(and incompatibl
Hey Silvain,
I think I talked to Tom about this some years ago, and he stated that the
GNURadio OOT block code has to be GPLv3 or at least a compatible license.
Because that for sure is a derivative work. But you might be right that it
does not need to be strictly GPLv3 and Tom might have also sta
> I think the GNURadio OOT block glue has to be GPLv3 in any case and that is
> fine.
Why ?
As long as the license is GPLv3 compatible you can publish it under
what you like.
Now of course when re-distributed as binary/complete system, the
effective license will be GPLv3 because the gplv3 compati
10 matches
Mail list logo
