>When in doubt, ask the author. Hi Darron, please do feel free to distribute sources of AnimationPackage to your client. I don't have any reason to be against that. My intent was always to make it usable in both commercial and non-commercial projects.
Best, Alex On 5/30/06, Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been looking at AnimationPackage [1], and realized I don't fully > understand the MPL license. I found [2] which seems to say MPL can > co-exist with other licenses but I have to deliver the source code; and > I think having to deliver the code is the only difference from BSD/MIT? > > But I'm still confused how licenses affect flash files; I'll introduce > my question with a made-up situation... bear with me. > > Lets say I write some clever software for a client that makes flash > files from data taken from a database. Perhaps they are screensavers, or > virtual pets, or animated birthday cards. Maybe for PCs, or maybe for > mobile phones. In addition to various tools (where I believe the license > does not matter) I use some open-source actionscript libraries; I don't > modify the libraries, just use them. > > My client is going to sell these to its members: either for a monthly > subscription fee, or a fee per flash file. [As a side question, does it > matter which of those two business models?] > > The software I deliver will be installed on my clients server. I.e. they > will install all those OS tools/libraries. I'll give them all source > code I wrote and they will own all code that isn't open source (i.e. > it'll be an asset on their books). > > And finally to my question: what does my client have to give its > customers? They fill out a form and download an swf. Is my client > obliged to: > a) Tell the customer what open source libraries were used in that swf? > b) Give customers a download link to those OS libraries? > c) Give customers a download link to the proprietary code I wrote > specially for my client? > > I've always assumed that even if the libraries I used are GPL that the > answer to all of those is no, but I may be wrong. What about MPL? > > Now, what about if I've modified one of the open source libraries? (And > for the sake of argument assume the patch was rejected by the OS project > in question as not general purpose enough.) Is it enough that I give my > client all source code? Or has the client suddenly become obligated to > tell their customers about it? And if so, for which licenses? > > Thanks for reading this far, > > Darren > > > [1]: http://www.alex-uhlmann.de/flash/animationpackage/ > > [2]: http://www.croftsoft.com/library/tutorials/gplmpl/ > > _______________________________________________ > osflash mailing list > [email protected] > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > -- http://snafoo.org/ key: 1BD689C0 (3801 6F51 4810 C674 1491 ADE7 D8F6 0203 1BD6 89C0) _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
