GPL patches *can* be used as they are not compiled into an application and can therefore be updated by the user, satisfying one aspect of the GPL. I handle this in PdParty by having the built in patches accessible by the user in the app’s Documents folder, so the user can modify them at will.
If you’re using a GPL patch as an abstraction, it’s *similar* to using a dynamic GPL library as far as I can tell. But I’m no lawyer... > On Apr 23, 2017, at 7:09 PM, pd-list-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: > > From: Matt Davey <hard....@gmail.com <mailto:hard....@gmail.com>> > Subject: Re: [PD] best licence for pd-patches? > Date: April 23, 2017 at 6:46:00 AM MDT > To: martin brinkmann <m...@martin-brinkmann.de > <mailto:m...@martin-brinkmann.de>> > Cc: "pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at>" > <pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at>> > > > i heard, and then read, that GPL patches CAN be run in closed source systems > running libpd, etc. > > it's just GPL externals that you can't use without sharing the code. > > There seems to be a difference in licensing laws between patches and > externals, because externals need to be compiled into the binary, but patches > are more like "media" which runs on top of that. > > I wish i could find the posts i read about that again....it did make it quite > clear why there is that distinction. -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
