Hi, and thanks for your reply. Sergey Yanovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I'd like to distribute some software under the same trilicence as mozilla >> (gpl/lgpl/mpl). >> >> I'd like to include two javascript files that are licenced under mpl only. >> So, >> I would provide a LICENCE file, and tell something along the lines of: >> every file in the project can be reused under the terms either of mpl or of >> gpl >> or of mpl. >> except files a and b, which can be reused under the terms of mpl only. > > This comment is posted in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT > ANY WARRANTY to the extent permitted by law; without even the implied > warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ;) > > In the case above, your software cannot be distributed in binary form > under GPL. This license requires each part of the product to be > GPL-licensed, which is also known as GPL-contamination.
As my software will be only scripts, I will not, strictly speaking, distribute something under a binary format. What does "binary format" mean in that specific case ? Is it really a binary compiled with gcc, or does it have a broader meaning, like "software in it's realeased format" ? > You can still distribute parts of its source code under GPL. F.e. > Mozilla patches MS CRT on windows, and that code isn't GPLed, but the > rest is. However, this partial application of GPL doesn't make a lot of > sense, if your product isn't usable without those 2 MPLed JavaScript files. My software will be perfectly usable without those files. If I can't find an easy solution, I'll just drop them. _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
