Chris Little wrote:
> Lynn is entirely correct. GPL specifically allows for system libraries.
> MFC is a system library, therefore allowed.
(Not surprisingly, I didn't happen to obtain a law degree within the past 5
hours, so I'm still not a lawyer!)
My understanding from what I have read (even before my earlier post) is that
the GPL allows linking with MFC, but that the Microsoft EULA does not allow
linking with anything copylefted. Just as the GPL doesn't allow linking from
proprietary programs (it would be invalid to add an exception to a
proprietary license saying, "You are allowed to link this with Sword from
Crosswire"), the relevant license agreement from Microsoft doesn't allow
linking MFC with code under the GPL or any other copyleft license. The
clause to this effect seems only to occur in the EULA with recent releases.
Not being a lawyer, I can't tell for sure whether the EULA actually bans
this. The "(or any derivative works thereof)" part from what I sent seems it
might, and the intent seems to be to avoid linking with copylefted software
(those last restrictions seem to target copyleft quite directly).
In addition there is a section above what I mentioned before stating,
"If you are authorized and choose to redistribute Sample Code or
Redistributable Code (collectively, the "Redistributables") as described in
Section 2, you agree: (i) except as otherwise noted in Section 2.1 (Sample
Code) to distribute the Redistributables only in object code form and in
conjunction with and as a part of a software application product developed by
you that adds significant and primary functionality to the Redistributables
("Licensee Software"); (ii) that the Redistributables only operate in
conjunction with Microsoft Windows platforms; (iii) to distribute the
Licensee Software containing the Redistributables pursuant to an end user
license agreement (which may be "break-the-seal", "click-wrap" or signed),
with terms no less protective than those contained in this EULA;"
Term "i" says that the developed application is included in the term "Licensee
Software", and term "iii" says that the Licensee Software must be under a
contract-based license agreement (direct contradiction to GPL section 5).
Then again, it looks like this might only be the case if the MFC dlls are
distributed with the app.
I would hope this is a non-issue and that I am misunderstanding the license,
but knowing Microsoft...
Relevant threads from other lists/forums on this topic I have seen include:
http://www.mail-archive.com/license-discuss%40opensource.org/msg07548.html
(in particular see
http://www.mail-archive.com/license-discuss%40opensource.org/msg07550.html
and
http://www.mail-archive.com/license-discuss%40opensource.org/msg07551.html
)
http://www.qtforum.org/thread.php?threadid=9100&sid=c2b2d45bc94fcc0cb7ef672e0fb9fbf1&threadview=0&hilight=&hilightuser=0&page=1
(Most of the EULA talk is actually on page 2 and 3)
-Jeremy Erickson
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
