To me it seems that clause 2.1.1 of the CCP4 academic license says that one can distribute work derived from or using the CCP4 libraries provided that it complies with clause 2.1.2 The last sentence in clause 2.1.2 says it itself becomes void if the derived work is distributed under the GPL or LGPL. Doesn't that mean that the CCP4 academic license does NOT impose any restrictions at all for work distributed under the LGPL or GPL, because anything that might restrict it is void?
Tim On Wednesday 04 July 2007 18:49, Kevin Cowtan wrote: > I was speaking imprecisely. I will try again. > > You cannot create a derived work containing both CCP4 6.* licensed code > and GPL'd code, and distribute the resulting program, since the GPL > demands that the derived work be distributed without additional > restirctions and the CCP4 6.* license imposes additional restrictions on > redistribution - in particular (but not limited to) an indemnity clause. > > Ethan A Merritt wrote: > > On Tuesday 03 July 2007 06:55, Kevin Cowtan wrote: > >> I'm afraid there is no ambiguity. You can't use the CCP4 version 6.* > >> libraries in GPL software. > > > > This sounds strange to me. > > The question is usually raised in the other direction - whether GPL > > libraries can be used by a non-GPL program [*]. > > > > Here you are saying that a GPL program cannot use non-GPL libraries. > > I believe this is false. To take an obvious example, consider GPL > > software running on Windows and calling into the system libraries. > > Do you think that Cygwin has been in violation of the GPL all these > > years? > > > > Or perhaps I misunderstand. Are you saying that the current CCP4 > > license does not permit combination with non-CCP4 code? -- Tim Grune Australian Synchrotron 800 Blackburn Road Clayton, VIC 3168 Australia
pgpJMJQenaGY9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
