On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Ankit Chaturvedi < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Gaurav Mishra <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Guys, >> >> Lately, got this case while working on a internal project. >> >> Let's say we have a X software which provides a API so that third party >> apps >> can integrate with the existing core system and extend functionality , now >> we are not changing any code here but using the underlying data via API. >> In >> that case should i need to open source my modules/third party app ? (I >> believe SugarCRM works that way only, however wordpress recently forced >> users to make there plugins open source which is contradictory). >> > > The straight answer is it depends on the license of the API. Generally > you'll find three popular licenses, so here's a simple explanation for these > cases. > > LGPL: Only propagates if original source code is modified. Any derivative > work is considered independent, so in your case no need to release the code. > If you do modify/add the APIs then you only have to release the modified > source, not your application's source. That is, no version of the library > can be non-free, though programs using this library can be free. > > GPLv1: Technically, GPL propagates upon linking to a GPL library. So if > your 3rd party software is gplv1, you will need to release your source too. > There are many caveats to this, mainly concerning the definition of linking > as GPL was mostly written with C in mind. Its status on partially compiled > languages (such as java) or interpreted languages is unclear at best. Due to > this confusion, authors usually add another 'artistic' license to their > libraries which do make such a distinction and hence may contain additional > clauses to the license. > > GPLv2: Terms state this: > > GNU GPL V2: 2. > These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If > identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, > and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in > themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those > sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you > distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based > on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of > this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the > entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it. > > So in this case again the boundaries aren't very clear but it does imply > that plugins/scripts etc will fall under gplv2. So in your case, if the api > is gplv2 and if your app cannot function without the said api (obviously) it > is deemed to be v2 and your source needs to be released. Again, many many > caveats though I'm not going to list them all. > > So in short, read the file called LICENSE and diff with the GPL text to > find out additions. Or ask the library author. Its important to note that > APIs themselves cannot be licensed under any circumstances. > > Wordpress is GPLv2, so plugins written using wordpress api are > automatically derived works and deemed GPL. Its only fair that plugin > writers not make their money off wordpress author's work when they > themselves aren't, right. > > Hope this helps. > > Thanks for the detailed explanation ankit. It really helped. Warm Regards Gaurav Mishra _______________________________________________ Ilugd mailing list [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
