[Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
Hey folks, I'm looking at using some GPL licensed code (Flade, to be specific) in a game I'm building for my employers. However, I can't find a clear answer anywhere as to what that implies for our source: does anyone know if using GPL licensed libraries means that we would have to release the source to our game? Or just the library, if I modify it? Or not at all? I assume compiling a SWF constitutes creating a binary version, but are we technically distributing it if it's loaded from a web server? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Henry Addendum for Free Software people: I'm not trying to circumvent the GPL here, just trying to understand the implications to my employer. Personally, I think open source is a fantastically good thing. I just need to know if I'm going to have to convince my bosses of that ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
GPL means you have to release source to your game. LGPL - well since it was written or C type langs. there is some (heated) debate about how to define linking in the context of dynamic languages; I've seen recently that there seems to be a creative commons license that explicitly says modification to code must be shared, code that just calls library functions doesn't. Henry Cooke wrote: Hey folks, I'm looking at using some GPL licensed code (Flade, to be specific) in a game I'm building for my employers. However, I can't find a clear answer anywhere as to what that implies for our source: does anyone know if using GPL licensed libraries means that we would have to release the source to our game? Or just the library, if I modify it? Or not at all? I assume compiling a SWF constitutes creating a binary version, but are we technically distributing it if it's loaded from a web server? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Henry Addendum for Free Software people: I'm not trying to circumvent the GPL here, just trying to understand the implications to my employer. Personally, I think open source is a fantastically good thing. I just need to know if I'm going to have to convince my bosses of that ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
It has always been the FSF's position that dynamically linking applications to libraries creates a single work derived from both the library code and the application code. The GPL requires that all derivative works be licensed under the GPL, an effect which can be described as hereditary. So, if an application links to a library licensed under the GPL, the application too must be licensed under the GPL. By contrast, libraries licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) may be linked to proprietary applications. Source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html FSF == Free Software Foundation If you have to go the GPL route, you can tell your employers that all the code is in the SWF anyway, making it available just takes away an extra step from the process of acquiring the code. This has some good FAQs: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html Good Luck, Rob. Henry Cooke wrote: Hey folks, I'm looking at using some GPL licensed code (Flade, to be specific) in a game I'm building for my employers. However, I can't find a clear answer anywhere as to what that implies for our source: does anyone know if using GPL licensed libraries means that we would have to release the source to our game? Or just the library, if I modify it? Or not at all? I assume compiling a SWF constitutes creating a binary version, but are we technically distributing it if it's loaded from a web server? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Henry Addendum for Free Software people: I'm not trying to circumvent the GPL here, just trying to understand the implications to my employer. Personally, I think open source is a fantastically good thing. I just need to know if I'm going to have to convince my bosses of that ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
Yeah for this instance (Action Script) if you extend a class in the licensed library then that extension must be available to all who ask for it. Robert Sanders wrote: GPL means you have to release source to your game. LGPL - well since it was written or C type langs. there is some (heated) debate about how to define linking in the context of dynamic languages; I've seen recently that there seems to be a creative commons license that explicitly says modification to code must be shared, code that just calls library functions doesn't. Henry Cooke wrote: Hey folks, I'm looking at using some GPL licensed code (Flade, to be specific) in a game I'm building for my employers. However, I can't find a clear answer anywhere as to what that implies for our source: does anyone know if using GPL licensed libraries means that we would have to release the source to our game? Or just the library, if I modify it? Or not at all? I assume compiling a SWF constitutes creating a binary version, but are we technically distributing it if it's loaded from a web server? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Henry Addendum for Free Software people: I'm not trying to circumvent the GPL here, just trying to understand the implications to my employer. Personally, I think open source is a fantastically good thing. I just need to know if I'm going to have to convince my bosses of that ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/781 - Release Date: 4/30/2007 9:14 AM ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
On 5/2/07, Robert Brisita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have to go the GPL route, you can tell your employers that all the code is in the SWF anyway, making it available just takes away an extra step from the process of acquiring the code. Uhm... I really don't think that can be decompiled qualifies as making code publicly available. Local vars and comments aside, the same would be true for Java and lots of other languages. Frankly, I think there is a good possibility the author intended the lib to be used the way you want to, and just chose the GPL as a generic open source license without giving the implications any thought. A short mail should clear things up, and a positive reply could be taken as permission (the author can license his code to anybody any way s/he pleases). So just mail the author, describe what you want to do, and ask nicely if it's OK. Generally, I would like some more clarity on the LGPL in regards to SWFs. The way I interpret it, libraries would have to be loaded as an extra SWF to be on the safe side, but I can't imagine this is the intention of most of the authors. Mark ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
Thanks guys. I emailed the author earlier today and got a nice, positive response - you were right, Mark, his position is that he doesn't want to place any restrictions on the way people use his work, short of passing it off as their own ;) I'm just trying to be super-careful here, because there's some IP issues, and the client are a fairly large, public organisation, so I'm trying to do everything by the book. Permission from the author rules all though, right? Obviously, I'm going to make sure he gets credit and there's a clear line between our work and his etc etc... Thanks again, h. On 02/05/07, Mark Winterhalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/2/07, Robert Brisita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have to go the GPL route, you can tell your employers that all the code is in the SWF anyway, making it available just takes away an extra step from the process of acquiring the code. Uhm... I really don't think that can be decompiled qualifies as making code publicly available. Local vars and comments aside, the same would be true for Java and lots of other languages. Frankly, I think there is a good possibility the author intended the lib to be used the way you want to, and just chose the GPL as a generic open source license without giving the implications any thought. A short mail should clear things up, and a positive reply could be taken as permission (the author can license his code to anybody any way s/he pleases). So just mail the author, describe what you want to do, and ask nicely if it's OK. Generally, I would like some more clarity on the LGPL in regards to SWFs. The way I interpret it, libraries would have to be loaded as an extra SWF to be on the safe side, but I can't imagine this is the intention of most of the authors. Mark ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
Does it say anywhere in the GPL that requested code has to be commented and readable? :-) Anyway the link I posted earlier should apply to all languages similar to JAVA considering LGPL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html The way I interpret it, libraries would have to be loaded as an extra SWF to be on the safe side I see it the same way. R. Mark Winterhalder wrote: On 5/2/07, Robert Brisita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have to go the GPL route, you can tell your employers that all the code is in the SWF anyway, making it available just takes away an extra step from the process of acquiring the code. Uhm... I really don't think that can be decompiled qualifies as making code publicly available. Local vars and comments aside, the same would be true for Java and lots of other languages. Frankly, I think there is a good possibility the author intended the lib to be used the way you want to, and just chose the GPL as a generic open source license without giving the implications any thought. A short mail should clear things up, and a positive reply could be taken as permission (the author can license his code to anybody any way s/he pleases). So just mail the author, describe what you want to do, and ask nicely if it's OK. Generally, I would like some more clarity on the LGPL in regards to SWFs. The way I interpret it, libraries would have to be loaded as an extra SWF to be on the safe side, but I can't imagine this is the intention of most of the authors. Mark ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Implications of using GPL'ed libraries?
Cool. his position is that he doesn't want to place any restrictions on the way people use his work, short of passing it off as their own Yeah, understand that. A BSD license would have been better or one of the newer CC licenses. Permission from the author rules all though, right? From my interpretation you are correct. I'm trying to do everything by the book. As we should all do when handling commercial products. R. Henry Cooke wrote: Thanks guys. I emailed the author earlier today and got a nice, positive response - you were right, Mark, his position is that he doesn't want to place any restrictions on the way people use his work, short of passing it off as their own ;) I'm just trying to be super-careful here, because there's some IP issues, and the client are a fairly large, public organisation, so I'm trying to do everything by the book. Permission from the author rules all though, right? Obviously, I'm going to make sure he gets credit and there's a clear line between our work and his etc etc... Thanks again, h. On 02/05/07, Mark Winterhalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/2/07, Robert Brisita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have to go the GPL route, you can tell your employers that all the code is in the SWF anyway, making it available just takes away an extra step from the process of acquiring the code. Uhm... I really don't think that can be decompiled qualifies as making code publicly available. Local vars and comments aside, the same would be true for Java and lots of other languages. Frankly, I think there is a good possibility the author intended the lib to be used the way you want to, and just chose the GPL as a generic open source license without giving the implications any thought. A short mail should clear things up, and a positive reply could be taken as permission (the author can license his code to anybody any way s/he pleases). So just mail the author, describe what you want to do, and ask nicely if it's OK. Generally, I would like some more clarity on the LGPL in regards to SWFs. The way I interpret it, libraries would have to be loaded as an extra SWF to be on the safe side, but I can't imagine this is the intention of most of the authors. Mark ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
