Juan Alberto Cirez wrote: > Just a dumb question: Is ActiveState(http://www.activestate.com) > Violating the GPL license under which perl is released by removing the > perl back-end compiler (perlcc) from their perl port, then developing a > SDK (PerlDev kit) with its own back-end compiler, charging a license fee > for the product and refusing to release the source code, or offer the > SDK free of charge...In short, taking something from the public > domain(open-source), modifying it, then close-sourcing it...?
perl is licensed under the Artistic License[1], which allows what you are describing, derivation and binary distribution as long as some simple conditions are met. The BSD License[2] also allows for closed source derivation. GPL[3] licensed software cannot be used in the same way. Which is why some commercial developers refer to the GPL as viral. Dave 1. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php 2. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php 3. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-license.php _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
