GPL

Problems compiling? Don't understand the source code? Don't know how to code your feature? Post here.

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

GPL

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-25 18:07

Hi, i'm just wondering about how much cover there is by the GPL. I was just sitting here thinking, and wondering about a few things, as i'm writing a program and need a bit more info.

Taking the source program is open source.

With the GPL, if you were to say modify someone elses code, and all you did was added a check for a dll file or something, and if it doesn't exist run as normal, otherwise let the dll take control, would the dll now become a program of its own? Or would it also be covered by the licence of the original program? Would the dll have to be open source?

Thanks

NoFiX
Posts: 19
Joined: 2003-02-23 10:39

Post by NoFiX » 2003-02-26 09:13

Why? Why does it matter to you?

aDe
Forum Moderator
Posts: 138
Joined: 2003-01-07 09:14
Location: SE
Contact:

Re: GPL

Post by aDe » 2003-02-26 09:21

NoFix:
Phantom wrote:as i'm writing a program and need a bit more info.
simple enough??
and also, what does it matter to you why it matters to him..? hehe

Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-26 15:09

Yeah, its not in regards to dc++. Just that I know that dc++ is also covered by the GPL and well I thought someone here might know something and be able to help me out.
Thanks

NoFiX
Posts: 19
Joined: 2003-02-23 10:39

Post by NoFiX » 2003-02-26 16:09

The main point is, no one cares.

Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-26 16:14

Well you may not, but I'm sure there are other software developers out there that would be willing to help me out. I did after all post this in the developers help section.
I don't really care if you think this post is pointless. If just 1 person that knows the answer sees it and replies, then thats good for me and any other developers that might have never thought about this, and are interested.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-02-26 16:55

Phantom, take this with a grain of salt, but go look at some archived Slashdot stories about "GPL Violations." Most of the advice there will be wrong, but if you read all of it, especially those at a lower comment threshold, you'll understand some of the issues. Especially since there have been some linux kernel drivers that are proprietary, and some companies have gone through a pretty big song and dance to get around having to release source to their drivers.

Now, if this were under the LGPL, the answer would probably be a simple: no.

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2003-02-26 16:58

NoFiX, shut up. You're ignorant.

sandos
Posts: 186
Joined: 2003-01-05 10:16
Contact:

Re: GPL

Post by sandos » 2003-02-26 17:24

Phantom wrote:With the GPL, if you were to say modify someone elses code, and all you did was added a check for a dll file or something, and if it doesn't exist run as normal, otherwise let the dll take control, would the dll now become a program of its own? Or would it also be covered by the licence of the original program? Would the dll have to be open source?
Go here:

http://www.brouhaha.com/~eric/editorial ... _link.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/license-dis ... 01660.html
http://lwn.net/2001/0628/a/esr-modules.php3

etc etc, basically just do "dynamic linking gpl" in the google searchbox. sigh.

Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-26 17:49

So basically they all say that there is no clear definition, and that it would be a matter of a court decision. *sigh*

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-02-26 18:00

Phantom wrote:So basically they all say that there is no clear definition, and that it would be a matter of a court decision. *sigh*
That seems to be my conclusion as well (thanks Sandos). It's Arne's place as the copyright holder to enforce license violations, so if he says that he won't sue you if it turns out to be illegal, then you can be somewhat more at ease.

Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-26 19:09

Its not with regard to dc++ anyway, its just I'm just thinking so that when I make some software and someone (hypothetically of course) wants to write a dll to override the basic functionality, I know where I stand if I used the GPL. Are there any other licences out there that do have this sort of cover?

Phantom
Posts: 72
Joined: 2003-01-11 20:13
Location: New Zealand

Post by Phantom » 2003-02-26 19:11

P.S. I love the work arne has done on this software. I use it all the time and wouldn't ever want to do something to say degrade the software or the work that has been done into it so far. In fact, I think i'll make a donation :)

Locked