On Mon, 22 May 2006 20:06:59 +0100 Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The third party jars are used via method calls, not by inheritance. > Even so the GPL is too vague. I suspect as a small development if it > went to court I could argue that there was no intent to deliberately > violate the licence, I intended to benefit society, and due to the > vagueness of the licence the general consensus/common sense would > hold true. However I won't be releasing the software under GPL (yet) > because of the potential risk.
There is no risk. You, as the copyright holder, are the only person who could sue for a violation of the license. Putting software under the GPL can only be a problem if it contains non-original elements that have a license that prohibits this. You do not have to honour the GPL, it's those who receive it who have to abide by it. -- Stefaan A Eeckels -- "There's nothing wrong with Java - well actually there is, but we won't intrude on private grief here - except that it is pretty presumptuous and demanding, and shows clear signs of fixation at the anal stage: it doesn't just throw exceptions, it throws tantrums." --Steve Blinkhorn _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
