Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello Olle, sure – more documentation is always good! It was a quite extensive discussion in the end. It could be added e.g. as a new wiki page. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson Sent: Monday, February 14, 2022 8:21 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine On 12 Feb 2022, at 09:40, Henning Westerholt mailto:h...@gilawa.com>> wrote: Hello, there is not that much the Kamailio project can do regarding the licensing questions. Even if we clarify our point of view, the license needs to be ultimately interpreted by lawyers or in court. And it will be also specific regarding different countries, like European countries, USA, China etc.. Actually, there is a difference between interpreted languages and compiled languages for the GPL. Its all explained in detail in this entry: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL I do not fully agree that there’s not much we can do. We need to help our users and developers. We can clearly write that while it’s our intention that all configurations should be un-affected by the GPL, we believe that using LUA may be affected and add the pointers you have shared in email. I think that would help people making the right decisions. /O Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org>> On Behalf Of Seven Du Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2022 1:37 AM To: Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>>; Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Thanks all now I understand better. to @Daniel-Constantin Mierla<mailto:mico...@gmail.com> regarding to the compiled lua code, I agree either it's an optimized binary or a dynamic .so. it doesn't have to be GPL. But as discussed above, if you load the compiled lua code into kamailio, it has to be GPL since it links to the C code anyway directly, it calls kamailio functions directly (e.g. t_relay()) but not via a socket, so that might applies to GPL unless that explicitly clarified. even the kamailio config scripts also has this problem, since kamailio config is not like *pure* config files e.g. .ini or .yaml, it has it's own logic, it calls functions in C, it's just another "language" like lua or js. The only difference is that the native config or lua code is not compiled at the same time of kamailio, it would be interpreted at run time by kamailio. but GPL doesn't care about compile time, it just cares if your code "calls" GPL functions. So if kamailio is not intended to restrict config or scripts via KEMI to force GPL it might be good to explicitly clarify it? Also thanks @Johansson, as the discussion is long I list my understanding or my question #5 here. According to the answer that means when I write a module to load into kamailio, I cannot link to libclosed.so as I cannot provide source code since it's by a 3-rd party I cannot own the code and it's not GPL. So the only way to use that libclosed.so with kamailio is to create a service and communicate with kamailio via socket, evapi or http or anything else. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:34 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>> wrote: I think it is not easy to impose any further restriction not to distribute the sources, but one can try ... in some (many) countries licenses and patents are not recognized or not enforced. Cheers, Daniel On 10.02.22 11:47, Alex Balashov wrote: Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it cannot be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov <mailto:abalas...@evaristesys.com> wrote: Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a right that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to demand source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t be, but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American jurisprudence, it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no matter how adverse to one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt <mailto:h...@gilawa.com> wrote: Hello, just to add to the discussion: • Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed there https://www.gnu.org/lic
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On 12 Feb 2022, at 09:40, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Hello, > > there is not that much the Kamailio project can do regarding the licensing > questions. Even if we clarify our point of view, the license needs to be > ultimately interpreted by lawyers or in court. And it will be also specific > regarding different countries, like European countries, USA, China etc.. > > Actually, there is a difference between interpreted languages and compiled > languages for the GPL. Its all explained in detail in this entry: > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL> > I do not fully agree that there’s not much we can do. We need to help our users and developers. We can clearly write that while it’s our intention that all configurations should be un-affected by the GPL, we believe that using LUA may be affected and add the pointers you have shared in email. I think that would help people making the right decisions. /O > Cheers, > > Henning > > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/> > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/> > > From: sr-users <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org>> On Behalf Of Seven Du > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2022 1:37 AM > To: Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>>; > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>> > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > Thanks all now I understand better. > > to @Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mailto:mico...@gmail.com> regarding to the > compiled lua code, I agree either it's an optimized binary or a dynamic .so. > it doesn't have to be GPL. But as discussed above, if you load the compiled > lua code into kamailio, it has to be GPL since it links to the C code anyway > directly, it calls kamailio functions directly (e.g. t_relay()) but not via a > socket, so that might applies to GPL unless that explicitly clarified. even > the kamailio config scripts also has this problem, since kamailio config is > not like *pure* config files e.g. .ini or .yaml, it has it's own logic, it > calls functions in C, it's just another "language" like lua or js. The only > difference is that the native config or lua code is not compiled at the same > time of kamailio, it would be interpreted at run time by kamailio. but GPL > doesn't care about compile time, it just cares if your code "calls" GPL > functions. > > So if kamailio is not intended to restrict config or scripts via KEMI to > force GPL it might be good to explicitly clarify it? > > Also thanks @Johansson, as the discussion is long I list my understanding or > my question #5 here. According to the answer that means when I write a module > to load into kamailio, I cannot link to libclosed.so as I cannot provide > source code since it's by a 3-rd party I cannot own the code and it's not > GPL. So the only way to use that libclosed.so with kamailio is to create a > service and communicate with kamailio via socket, evapi or http or anything > else. > > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:34 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mailto:mico...@gmail.com>> wrote: > I think it is not easy to impose any further restriction not to distribute > the sources, but one can try ... in some (many) countries licenses and > patents are not recognized or not enforced. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > On 10.02.22 11:47, Alex Balashov wrote: > Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it cannot > be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > > > On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov > <mailto:abalas...@evaristesys.com> wrote: > > Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a right > that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to demand > source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? > > I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t be, > but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American jurisprudence, > it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no matter how adverse to > one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > > > On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt > <mailto:h...@gilawa.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > just to add to the discussion: >
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, there is not that much the Kamailio project can do regarding the licensing questions. Even if we clarify our point of view, the license needs to be ultimately interpreted by lawyers or in court. And it will be also specific regarding different countries, like European countries, USA, China etc.. Actually, there is a difference between interpreted languages and compiled languages for the GPL. Its all explained in detail in this entry: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users On Behalf Of Seven Du Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2022 1:37 AM To: Daniel-Constantin Mierla ; Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Thanks all now I understand better. to @Daniel-Constantin Mierla<mailto:mico...@gmail.com> regarding to the compiled lua code, I agree either it's an optimized binary or a dynamic .so. it doesn't have to be GPL. But as discussed above, if you load the compiled lua code into kamailio, it has to be GPL since it links to the C code anyway directly, it calls kamailio functions directly (e.g. t_relay()) but not via a socket, so that might applies to GPL unless that explicitly clarified. even the kamailio config scripts also has this problem, since kamailio config is not like *pure* config files e.g. .ini or .yaml, it has it's own logic, it calls functions in C, it's just another "language" like lua or js. The only difference is that the native config or lua code is not compiled at the same time of kamailio, it would be interpreted at run time by kamailio. but GPL doesn't care about compile time, it just cares if your code "calls" GPL functions. So if kamailio is not intended to restrict config or scripts via KEMI to force GPL it might be good to explicitly clarify it? Also thanks @Johansson, as the discussion is long I list my understanding or my question #5 here. According to the answer that means when I write a module to load into kamailio, I cannot link to libclosed.so as I cannot provide source code since it's by a 3-rd party I cannot own the code and it's not GPL. So the only way to use that libclosed.so with kamailio is to create a service and communicate with kamailio via socket, evapi or http or anything else. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:34 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>> wrote: I think it is not easy to impose any further restriction not to distribute the sources, but one can try ... in some (many) countries licenses and patents are not recognized or not enforced. Cheers, Daniel On 10.02.22 11:47, Alex Balashov wrote: Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it cannot be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov <mailto:abalas...@evaristesys.com> wrote: Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a right that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to demand source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t be, but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American jurisprudence, it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no matter how adverse to one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt <mailto:h...@gilawa.com> wrote: Hello, just to add to the discussion: · Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html · You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org> On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hi Seven! Note that many of these questions open a legal
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Thanks all now I understand better. to @Daniel-Constantin Mierla regarding to the compiled lua code, I agree either it's an optimized binary or a dynamic .so. it doesn't have to be GPL. But as discussed above, if you load the compiled lua code into kamailio, it has to be GPL since it links to the C code anyway directly, it calls kamailio functions directly (e.g. t_relay()) but not via a socket, so that might applies to GPL unless that explicitly clarified. even the kamailio config scripts also has this problem, since kamailio config is not like *pure* config files e.g. .ini or .yaml, it has it's own logic, it calls functions in C, it's just another "language" like lua or js. The only difference is that the native config or lua code is not compiled at the same time of kamailio, it would be interpreted at run time by kamailio. but GPL doesn't care about compile time, it just cares if your code "calls" GPL functions. So if kamailio is not intended to restrict config or scripts via KEMI to force GPL it might be good to explicitly clarify it? Also thanks @Johansson, as the discussion is long I list my understanding or my question #5 here. According to the answer that means when I write a module to load into kamailio, I cannot link to libclosed.so as I cannot provide source code since it's by a 3-rd party I cannot own the code and it's not GPL. So the only way to use that libclosed.so with kamailio is to create a service and communicate with kamailio via socket, evapi or http or anything else. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:34 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > I think it is not easy to impose any further restriction not to distribute > the sources, but one can try ... in some (many) countries licenses and > patents are not recognized or not enforced. > > Cheers, > Daniel > On 10.02.22 11:47, Alex Balashov wrote: > > Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it > cannot be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > > On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov > wrote: > > Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a > right that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to > demand source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? > > I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t > be, but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American > jurisprudence, it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no > matter how adverse to one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > > On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > just to add to the discussion: > > > >- Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are >discussed there >https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html >- You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions > > > > Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my > understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be > independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets > the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would > fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for > it. Compare e.g., to this: > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > > > Cheers, > > > > Henning > > > > -- > > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ > > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com > > > > *From:* sr-users > *On Behalf Of *Olle E. Johansson > *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM > *To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > > *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > Hi Seven! > > Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been > going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be > the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of > discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. > > > > First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when > your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the > written source code files. > > > > Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have > the copyright to your source code. > > > > In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than > the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
I think it is not easy to impose any further restriction not to distribute the sources, but one can try ... in some (many) countries licenses and patents are not recognized or not enforced. Cheers, Daniel On 10.02.22 11:47, Alex Balashov wrote: > Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it > cannot be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > >> On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov >> wrote: >> >> Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a >> right that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right >> to demand source code and then turn around and distribute that source >> code? >> >> I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it >> shouldn’t be, but in principle, in the prevailing theme of >> Anglo-American jurisprudence, it’s possible to contract away pretty >> much anything, no matter how adverse to one’s interests, so long as >> it is done “freely”. >> >> — >> Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. >> >>> On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> >>> just to add to the discussion: >>> >>> >>> >>> * Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised >>> are discussed there >>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html >>> * You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions >>> >>> >>> >>> Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) >>> – my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would >>> be independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the >>> customer gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is >>> pre-compiled would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right >>> to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: >>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> >>> Henning >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ >>> <https://skalatan.de/blog/> >>> >>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* sr-users *On Behalf Of >>> *Olle E. Johansson >>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM >>> *To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >>> *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Seven! >>> >>> Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has >>> been going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, >>> which may not be the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in >>> these kind of discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. >>> >>> >>> >>> First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is >>> when your application is executing in a system. The other is the >>> license of the written source code files. >>> >>> >>> >>> Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always >>> have the copyright to your source code. >>> >>> >>> >>> In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different >>> license than the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that >>> source code and create a new product that license applies. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run >>> Kamailio in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless >>> of the license of various source code files. >>> >>> >>> >>> Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a >>> customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver >>> (according to GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights >>> to the source. >>> >>> >>> >>> Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the >>> recipient of the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I >>> am not your customer, I can’t demand th
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, On 10.02.22 10:51, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Hello, > > Just to add - your general statement “From this perspective, none of > the config files (no matter they are native scripting, lua, python, > javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the decision of the > config author what's its license.” > > This seems to be pretty clear to me as well, the previous discussion > was more a question of this pre-compiled Lua files. > I also referred to the pre-compiled lua files (listed the other types of configs for sake of completion). In this particular case Lua (and luac) are anyhow distributed under MIT (iirc) and compiling a kamailio.lua file is like: luac kamailio.lua There is no directly linking against any .c/.h/.o/.so file from kamailio. Maybe it is a little stretched to say compiled in this case, imo, I think it is more like parsing and create a binary-optimized file that lua interpreter (or liblua functions) can load and execute faster, it does not generate machine code, as I understand. Further more, even if luac would be GPL, I don't think that compiling file.lua would mean that file.lua nor the resulting file.bin will be forced to be GPL, in that way everything compiled with GCC would be forced to be GPL. I found that Perl has some statement on their web page, but not sure how much legal binding is behind it, it is stated as a personal opinion from Larry: * https://dev.perl.org/licenses/ If I would try to make a rule regarding compiled/binary apps/components, maybe I would say it like: if there is a single binary component that is shipped and it was build from different source components of which at least one is GPL, then sources of all these components must be distributed under GPL due to its virality. In Kamailio case, we have kamailio app binary and kamailio.cfg (or kamailio.lua) shipped as separate files/components. Obviously, ultimately a judge can have the final world, and can be from case to case, country to county, judge to judge, ... Cheers, Daniel > Cheers, > > > > Henning > > > > > > *From:* Henning Westerholt > *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2022 10:46 AM > *To:* mico...@gmail.com; Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > > *Subject:* RE: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > Hello, > > > > for me it’s seems to be not that clear, its open to interpretation. > But this is more a theoretical discussion, it should be clarified from > a lawyer. > > To quote from the GPL FAQ: > > > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > “Another similar and very common case is to provide libraries with the > interpreter which are themselves interpreted. For instance, Perl comes > with many Perl modules[..]. These libraries and the programs that call > them are always dynamically linked together. > > A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules [..] in > your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way, > regardless of the license used in the Perl [..] interpreter that the > combined Perl [..] program will run on. “ > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation > > “Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they > form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, > the whole combination must also be released under the GPL—if you > can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them. > > [..] if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, > exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis > to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.” > > This seems to apply to the KEMI Lua. You execute the Kamailio (GPL) > function in your KEMI script by some library mechanism. > > The Lua script and Kamailio are not using a standardized interface to > interact together like e.g., SIP messages, it’s a custom specific one. > > > > But if its specific enough to fall under this license restriction is > the main point, we can probably not answer fully from our side. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Henning > > > > *From:*Daniel-Constantin Mierla > *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2022 9:01 AM > *To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > ; Henning Westerholt > *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > Hello, > > On 10.02.22 08:36, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Hello, > > > > just to add to the discussion: > > > > 1. Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve > raised are discussed there > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html > > 2. You
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Come to think of it, I imagine the license has language saying that it cannot be superseded in part or in whole by any contradictory agreement. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Feb 10, 2022, at 5:42 AM, Alex Balashov wrote: > > Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a right > that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to demand > source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? > > I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t be, > but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American jurisprudence, > it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no matter how adverse to > one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > >>> On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: >>> >> >> Hello, >> >> just to add to the discussion: >> >> Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed >> there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html >> You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions >> >> Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my >> understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be >> independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the >> “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall >> under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. >> Compare e.g., to this: >> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL >> >> Cheers, >> >> Henning >> >> -- >> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ >> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com >> >> From: sr-users On Behalf Of Olle E. >> Johansson >> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM >> To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine >> >> Hi Seven! >> Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been >> going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be >> the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of >> discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. >> >> First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when >> your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the >> written source code files. >> >> Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have >> the copyright to your source code. >> >> In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than >> the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source code and >> create a new product that license applies. >> >> Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run Kamailio >> in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of the license of >> various source code files. >> >> Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a >> customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver (according >> to GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights to the source. >> >> Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the recipient of >> the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I am not your customer, >> I can’t demand the source code according to the GPL. The customer that >> receives the code has the right to do whatever they want with it - like >> publishing the source on GitHub for the world to enjoy. >> >> >> >> >> 10 feb. 2022 kl. 00:16 skrev Seven Du : >> >> I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: >> >> 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without change, and >> sell to a customer. and when the customer asks for source, I told him to >> download from the kamailio website, since I didn't change anything. Is that >> correct? >> How you distribute the source code to the customer is irrelevant here. Note >> that if you end up having to provide it on a floppy disk or a USB stick, you >> can charge for that according to the GPL :-) >> >> >> 2. I can also host the source on my own website, with some more helper >> scripts for building and packaging. That should be better? >> I can’t judge if it’s better or worse, it h
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Is it legally possible for a customer to separately contract away a right that the license otherwise affords them, such as the GPL right to demand source code and then turn around and distribute that source code? I have to wonder if it’s possible in the US. It seems like it shouldn’t be, but in principle, in the prevailing theme of Anglo-American jurisprudence, it’s possible to contract away pretty much anything, no matter how adverse to one’s interests, so long as it is done “freely”. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:37 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > > Hello, > > just to add to the discussion: > > Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed > there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html > You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions > > Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my > understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be independent > of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the “source > code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall under the > GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., > to this: > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > Cheers, > > Henning > > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com > > From: sr-users On Behalf Of Olle E. > Johansson > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM > To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > Hi Seven! > Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been going > on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be the > full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of discussions for > almost 30 years of working in open source. > > First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when > your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the > written source code files. > > Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have the > copyright to your source code. > > In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than > the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source code and > create a new product that license applies. > > Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run Kamailio in > your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of the license of > various source code files. > > Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a > customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver (according to > GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights to the source. > > Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the recipient of > the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I am not your customer, I > can’t demand the source code according to the GPL. The customer that receives > the code has the right to do whatever they want with it - like publishing the > source on GitHub for the world to enjoy. > > > > > 10 feb. 2022 kl. 00:16 skrev Seven Du : > > I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: > > 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without change, and sell > to a customer. and when the customer asks for source, I told him to download > from the kamailio website, since I didn't change anything. Is that correct? > How you distribute the source code to the customer is irrelevant here. Note > that if you end up having to provide it on a floppy disk or a USB stick, you > can charge for that according to the GPL :-) > > > 2. I can also host the source on my own website, with some more helper > scripts for building and packaging. That should be better? > I can’t judge if it’s better or worse, it has very little relevance to with > the license. Just make sure that you include the signatures made by the > Kamailio team so the customer can trace it back to the source and make sure > there’s no changes. > > > > 3. I write a new module, 100% code wrote from scratch, just follow the module > guidelines or example code to expose/add hooks to core, dynamically loaded > into kamailio. Do I need to use GPL or can it be any license or even closed > source? can I sell the standalone module in binary? > Your source code has to be licensed in a license that can end up being > compatible with GPL. You can not have a commercial license on it, si
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, Just to add - your general statement “From this perspective, none of the config files (no matter they are native scripting, lua, python, javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the decision of the config author what's its license.” This seems to be pretty clear to me as well, the previous discussion was more a question of this pre-compiled Lua files. Cheers, Henning From: Henning Westerholt Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 10:46 AM To: mico...@gmail.com; Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: RE: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hello, for me it’s seems to be not that clear, its open to interpretation. But this is more a theoretical discussion, it should be clarified from a lawyer. To quote from the GPL FAQ: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL “Another similar and very common case is to provide libraries with the interpreter which are themselves interpreted. For instance, Perl comes with many Perl modules[..]. These libraries and the programs that call them are always dynamically linked together. A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules [..] in your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way, regardless of the license used in the Perl [..] interpreter that the combined Perl [..] program will run on. “ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation “Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL—if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them. [..] if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.” This seems to apply to the KEMI Lua. You execute the Kamailio (GPL) function in your KEMI script by some library mechanism. The Lua script and Kamailio are not using a standardized interface to interact together like e.g., SIP messages, it’s a custom specific one. But if its specific enough to fall under this license restriction is the main point, we can probably not answer fully from our side. Cheers, Henning From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 9:01 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>>; Henning Westerholt mailto:h...@gilawa.com>> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hello, On 10.02.22 08:36, Henning Westerholt wrote: Hello, just to add to the discussion: 1. Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html 2. You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL I guess that the pre-compile is done by the luac, because Kamailio does not have such feature. Kamailio can only load a lua script (plain or pre-compiled) and push it as a parameter to liblua functions. In my opinion this is only file/data loading from kamailio point of view, definitely does not seem a linking/compile operation. It can be seen as something similar to reading SIP messages from the socket (everything is a file descriptor in unix/linux philosophy) and I assume nobody considers that received/sent SIP messages have to be GPL. From this perspective, none of the config files (no matter they are native scripting, lua, python, javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the decision of the config author what's its license. Cheers, Daniel Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org> On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hi Seven! Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when your application
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, for me it’s seems to be not that clear, its open to interpretation. But this is more a theoretical discussion, it should be clarified from a lawyer. To quote from the GPL FAQ: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL “Another similar and very common case is to provide libraries with the interpreter which are themselves interpreted. For instance, Perl comes with many Perl modules[..]. These libraries and the programs that call them are always dynamically linked together. A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules [..] in your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way, regardless of the license used in the Perl [..] interpreter that the combined Perl [..] program will run on. “ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation “Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL—if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them. [..] if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.” This seems to apply to the KEMI Lua. You execute the Kamailio (GPL) function in your KEMI script by some library mechanism. The Lua script and Kamailio are not using a standardized interface to interact together like e.g., SIP messages, it’s a custom specific one. But if its specific enough to fall under this license restriction is the main point, we can probably not answer fully from our side. Cheers, Henning From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 9:01 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List ; Henning Westerholt Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hello, On 10.02.22 08:36, Henning Westerholt wrote: Hello, just to add to the discussion: 1. Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html 2. You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL I guess that the pre-compile is done by the luac, because Kamailio does not have such feature. Kamailio can only load a lua script (plain or pre-compiled) and push it as a parameter to liblua functions. In my opinion this is only file/data loading from kamailio point of view, definitely does not seem a linking/compile operation. It can be seen as something similar to reading SIP messages from the socket (everything is a file descriptor in unix/linux philosophy) and I assume nobody considers that received/sent SIP messages have to be GPL. From this perspective, none of the config files (no matter they are native scripting, lua, python, javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the decision of the config author what's its license. Cheers, Daniel Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org> On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hi Seven! Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the written source code files. Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have the copyright to your source code. In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source code and create a new product that license applies. Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run Kamailio in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of the license of various source code files. Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On 10 Feb 2022, at 09:01, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > > Hello, > > On 10.02.22 08:36, Henning Westerholt wrote: >> Hello, >> >> just to add to the discussion: >> >> Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed >> there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html >> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html> >> You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions >> >> Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my >> understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be >> independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the >> “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall >> under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. >> Compare e.g., to >> this:https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL >> >> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL> >> > I guess that the pre-compile is done by the luac, because Kamailio does not > have such feature. Kamailio can only load a lua script (plain or > pre-compiled) and push it as a parameter to liblua functions. In my opinion > this is only file/data loading from kamailio point of view, definitely does > not seem a linking/compile operation. It can be seen as something similar to > reading SIP messages from the socket (everything is a file descriptor in > unix/linux philosophy) and I assume nobody considers that received/sent SIP > messages have to be GPL. > > From this perspective, none of the config files (no matter they are native > scripting, lua, python, javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the > decision of the config author what's its license. > I suggest that we formally clarify this just to avoid any misunderstandings, much like we did in Asterisk. /O > Cheers, > Daniel > > > >> Cheers, >> >> Henning >> >> -- >> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/> >> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/> >> >> From: sr-users >> <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org> On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson >> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM >> To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >> <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> >> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine >> >> Hi Seven! >> Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been >> going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be >> the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of >> discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. >> >> First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when >> your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the >> written source code files. >> >> Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have >> the copyright to your source code. >> >> In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than >> the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source code and >> create a new product that license applies. >> >> Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run Kamailio >> in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of the license of >> various source code files. >> >> Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a >> customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver (according >> to GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights to the source. >> >> Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the recipient of >> the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I am not your customer, >> I can’t demand the source code according to the GPL. The customer that >> receives the code has the right to do whatever they want with it - like >> publishing the source on GitHub for the world to enjoy. >> >> >> >> >> 10 feb. 2022 kl. 00:16 skrev Seven Du > <mailto:dujinf...@gmail.com>>: >> >> I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: >> >> 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without change, and >> sell to a customer. and when the customer asks for source, I told him to >> download from the kamail
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, On 10.02.22 08:36, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Hello, > > > > just to add to the discussion: > > > > * Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are > discussed there > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html > * You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions > > > > Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – > my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be > independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer > gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled > would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the > source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > > I guess that the pre-compile is done by the luac, because Kamailio does not have such feature. Kamailio can only load a lua script (plain or pre-compiled) and push it as a parameter to liblua functions. In my opinion this is only file/data loading from kamailio point of view, definitely does not seem a linking/compile operation. It can be seen as something similar to reading SIP messages from the socket (everything is a file descriptor in unix/linux philosophy) and I assume nobody considers that received/sent SIP messages have to be GPL. >From this perspective, none of the config files (no matter they are native scripting, lua, python, javascript, etc...) are forced to be GPL, it is the decision of the config author what's its license. Cheers, Daniel > Cheers, > > > > Henning > > > > -- > > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/> > > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/> > > > > *From:* sr-users *On Behalf Of > *Olle E. Johansson > *Sent:* Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM > *To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > Hi Seven! > > Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has > been going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which > may not be the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these > kind of discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. > > > > First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is > when your application is executing in a system. The other is the > license of the written source code files. > > > > Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always > have the copyright to your source code. > > > > In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license > than the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source > code and create a new product that license applies. > > > > Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run > Kamailio in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of > the license of various source code files. > > > > Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a > customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver > (according to GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights to > the source. > > > > Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the > recipient of the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I am > not your customer, I can’t demand the source code according to the > GPL. The customer that receives the code has the right to do whatever > they want with it - like publishing the source on GitHub for the world > to enjoy. > > > > > > > > 10 feb. 2022 kl. 00:16 skrev Seven Du : > > > > I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: > > > > 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without > change, and sell to a customer. and when the customer asks for > source, I told him to download from the kamailio website, since I > didn't change anything. Is that correct? > > How you distribute the source code to the customer is irrelevant here. > Note that if you end up having to provide it on a floppy disk or a USB > stick, you can charge for that according to the GPL :-) > > > > 2. I can also host the source on my own website, with some more > helper scripts for building and packaging. That should be better? > > I can’t judge if it’s better or worse, it has very little relevance to > with the license. Just make sure that you include the signatures made > by the Kamailio team so the customer can trace it back to the
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, just to add to the discussion: * Please have a look to the GPLv2 FAQ, many topics you’ve raised are discussed there https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html * You should really consult a lawyer for this specific questions Regarding the licence of the configuration (native script vs. KEMI) – my understanding would be that a native Kamailio cfg script would be independent of GPL as its interpreted (and practically the customer gets the “source code” anyway). But KEMI LUA code that is pre-compiled would fall under the GPL, so the customer has a right to get the source code for it. Compare e.g., to this: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users On Behalf Of Olle E. Johansson Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:13 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hi Seven! Note that many of these questions open a legal discussion that has been going on for many years. I base my answers on what I know, which may not be the full truth. Regardless, I have been involved in these kind of discussions for almost 30 years of working in open source. First, note that there are two kind of situations to observe. One is when your application is executing in a system. The other is the license of the written source code files. Secondly, license and copyright are two different things. You always have the copyright to your source code. In Kamailio there are source code files that have a different license than the rest of the files. That means that if you copy that source code and create a new product that license applies. Kamailio as a whole is released under GPL version 2. When you run Kamailio in your server, that license applies to it all, regardless of the license of various source code files. Also note that I base this discussion on a delivery of a system to a customer. When you run Kamailio as a service you do not deliver (according to GPL v2) and the customer doesn’t have the same rights to the source. Also note that (as other persons has pointed out) that it’s the recipient of the binaries that has the rights, not the world. If I am not your customer, I can’t demand the source code according to the GPL. The customer that receives the code has the right to do whatever they want with it - like publishing the source on GitHub for the world to enjoy. 10 feb. 2022 kl. 00:16 skrev Seven Du mailto:dujinf...@gmail.com>>: I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without change, and sell to a customer. and when the customer asks for source, I told him to download from the kamailio website, since I didn't change anything. Is that correct? How you distribute the source code to the customer is irrelevant here. Note that if you end up having to provide it on a floppy disk or a USB stick, you can charge for that according to the GPL :-) 2. I can also host the source on my own website, with some more helper scripts for building and packaging. That should be better? I can’t judge if it’s better or worse, it has very little relevance to with the license. Just make sure that you include the signatures made by the Kamailio team so the customer can trace it back to the source and make sure there’s no changes. 3. I write a new module, 100% code wrote from scratch, just follow the module guidelines or example code to expose/add hooks to core, dynamically loaded into kamailio. Do I need to use GPL or can it be any license or even closed source? can I sell the standalone module in binary? Your source code has to be licensed in a license that can end up being compatible with GPL. You can not have a commercial license on it, since when executing it as part of Kamailio, GPL applies. Since your module ends up being GPL while running in a system you deliver for a fee or for free to your customer, your customers has a right to the source code. 4. my module still should be GPL since I have to call GPL code in kamailio source, e.g. string functions in core. or maybe it's ok if string functions in kamailio core is BSD? When executing ALL of Kamailio is GPL, including all linked modules. 5. If my module link to a 3rd party lib (e.g. libclosed-source.so or libclosed-source.a I think there's no difference?) which is not open source (but free to sell), can I sell it w/o the source of libclosed-source ? Linking means that you execute in the same processes and according to most this means that GPL applies. That’s why we have a lot of protocols where most people think that GPL does not apply, even though some people want to discuss that. In my personal view it’s ok to write commercial software that communicates over RPC or by using the
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
ready to answer. I think the intention of the Kamailio dev team is that your code should not be affected by GPL, but we may want to clarify that. If you write a regular configuration script I would personally clearly think you have the rights to that. The idea with KEMI was to introduce modern ways of writing configuration scripts. > > Thanks. I don't mean to violate the GPL, just want to be clear and easier to > understand the license. Always good to start the day with a GPL discussion :-) Cheers, /O > > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 9:05 PM Henning Westerholt <mailto:h...@gilawa.com>> wrote: > Hello, > > (just to add the obvious disclaimer that this is not legal advice, I am not a > lawyer). > > > [Would it be ok] if it were [using] a standalone service to which Kamailio > > interfaced using very narrowly confined and general-purpose communication > > channels? > > I do not think there is a problem regarding to the GPL in this case. > Interfacing over SIP/HTTP/RPC/XMLRPC or other standard mechanism to a > dedicated process would not establish a close coupling between Kamailio and > the other code. > > > I think it's correct. e.g. if you use evapi or http to talk to your service > you don't have to open source your service code. > > Cheers, > > Henning > > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/> > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/> > > -Original Message- > From: sr-users <mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.kamailio.org>> On Behalf Of Alex Balashov > Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:50 PM > To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>> > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:46 AM, Henning Westerholt > <mailto:h...@gilawa.com>> wrote: > > > >> If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, > >> that almost surely means combining them into one program.” > > > > This is exactly what applies to Kamailio due to the core and module > > architecture. The core and modules also share common data structures and > > memory segments. > > I see. So, practically, the only way a custom module could be considered > meaningfully separate according to these criteria is if it were a standalone > service to which Kamailio interfaced using very narrowly confined and > general-purpose communication channels? > > — Alex > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ <http://www.evaristesys.com/>, > http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > <https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users> > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > <https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users> > > > -- > About: http://about.me/dujinfang <http://about.me/dujinfang> > Blog: http://www.dujinfang.com <http://www.dujinfang.com/> > Proj: http://www.freeswitch.org.cn > <http://www.freeswitch.org.cn/>__ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
I have some questions on this, e.g. on Kamailio: 1. The core and some modules is GPL. I packaged that without change, and sell to a customer. and when the customer asks for source, I told him to download from the kamailio website, since I didn't change anything. Is that correct? 2. I can also host the source on my own website, with some more helper scripts for building and packaging. That should be better? 3. I write a new module, 100% code wrote from scratch, just follow the module guidelines or example code to expose/add hooks to core, dynamically loaded into kamailio. Do I need to use GPL or can it be any license or even closed source? can I sell the standalone module in binary? 4. my module still should be GPL since I have to call GPL code in kamailio source, e.g. string functions in core. or maybe it's ok if string functions in kamailio core is BSD? 5. If my module link to a 3rd party lib (e.g. libclosed-source.so or libclosed-source.a I think there's no difference?) which is not open source (but free to sell), can I sell it w/o the source of libclosed-source ? 6. If answer to 5 is yes, I can write my own libclosed-source and sell with whatever license? 7. Regards to KEMI, if I write routing scripts with Lua (compiled with luac) and sell to a customer, should I open source the Lua code? The Lua code calls Kamailio core functions which might be GPL. Thanks. I don't mean to violate the GPL, just want to be clear and easier to understand the license. On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 9:05 PM Henning Westerholt wrote: > Hello, > > (just to add the obvious disclaimer that this is not legal advice, I am > not a lawyer). > > > [Would it be ok] if it were [using] a standalone service to which > Kamailio interfaced using very narrowly confined and general-purpose > communication channels? > > I do not think there is a problem regarding to the GPL in this case. > Interfacing over SIP/HTTP/RPC/XMLRPC or other standard mechanism to a > dedicated process would not establish a close coupling between Kamailio and > the other code. > > I think it's correct. e.g. if you use evapi or http to talk to your service you don't have to open source your service code. > Cheers, > > Henning > > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com > > -Original Message- > From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex > Balashov > Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:50 PM > To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > > > On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:46 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > > >> If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address > space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.” > > > > This is exactly what applies to Kamailio due to the core and module > architecture. The core and modules also share common data structures and > memory segments. > > I see. So, practically, the only way a custom module could be considered > meaningfully separate according to these criteria is if it were a > standalone service to which Kamailio interfaced using very narrowly > confined and general-purpose communication channels? > > — Alex > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to > the sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to > the sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > -- About: http://about.me/dujinfang Blog: http://www.dujinfang.com Proj: http://www.freeswitch.org.cn __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, (just to add the obvious disclaimer that this is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer). > [Would it be ok] if it were [using] a standalone service to which Kamailio > interfaced using very narrowly confined and general-purpose communication > channels? I do not think there is a problem regarding to the GPL in this case. Interfacing over SIP/HTTP/RPC/XMLRPC or other standard mechanism to a dedicated process would not establish a close coupling between Kamailio and the other code. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com -Original Message- From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:50 PM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:46 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > >> If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, >> that almost surely means combining them into one program.” > > This is exactly what applies to Kamailio due to the core and module > architecture. The core and modules also share common data structures and > memory segments. I see. So, practically, the only way a custom module could be considered meaningfully separate according to these criteria is if it were a standalone service to which Kamailio interfaced using very narrowly confined and general-purpose communication channels? — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:46 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > >> If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, >> that almost surely means combining them into one program.” > > This is exactly what applies to Kamailio due to the core and module > architecture. The core and modules also share common data structures and > memory segments. I see. So, practically, the only way a custom module could be considered meaningfully separate according to these criteria is if it were a standalone service to which Kamailio interfaced using very narrowly confined and general-purpose communication channels? — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello Alex, > If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, > that almost surely means combining them into one program.” This is exactly what applies to Kamailio due to the core and module architecture. The core and modules also share common data structures and memory segments. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com -Original Message- From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:40 PM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:34 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > have a look to the FAQ link I quoted earlier, they give some examples there. Well, they do hint at some of the considerations… 1) "We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).” 2) "If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.” 3) "By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.” But this doesn’t seem conclusive in the case of Kamailio, at least to my mind. How does “run together in a shared address space” apply to a core that intentionally loads specific symbols from ELF modules (i.e. via dlsym() & friends) vs. dynamic linking at compile time? Or is that firmly established? The only real definitive answer seems to be: "What constitutes combining two parts into one program? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide.” :-) — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:34 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > have a look to the FAQ link I quoted earlier, they give some examples there. Well, they do hint at some of the considerations… 1) "We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).” 2) "If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.” 3) "By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.” But this doesn’t seem conclusive in the case of Kamailio, at least to my mind. How does “run together in a shared address space” apply to a core that intentionally loads specific symbols from ELF modules (i.e. via dlsym() & friends) vs. dynamic linking at compile time? Or is that firmly established? The only real definitive answer seems to be: "What constitutes combining two parts into one program? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide.” :-) — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hi Alex, have a look to the FAQ link I quoted earlier, they give some examples there. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com -Original Message- From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:27 PM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:02 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Generally speaking - if you combine "closely" GPL v2 and proprietary code, > the result needs to be also GPLv2. So, your example would not work from a > licence point of view for proprietary licensing. Well, that’s just it; what’s the standard of “closely” being appealed to here, in technical terms? I assume the licence leaves it sufficiently vague that any given case would need to be judicially tested, but perhaps there is ample prior experience with architectures substantially similar to Kamailio? — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On Feb 9, 2022, at 7:02 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote: > > Generally speaking - if you combine "closely" GPL v2 and proprietary code, > the result needs to be also GPLv2. So, your example would not work from a > licence point of view for proprietary licensing. Well, that’s just it; what’s the standard of “closely” being appealed to here, in technical terms? I assume the licence leaves it sufficiently vague that any given case would need to be judicially tested, but perhaps there is ample prior experience with architectures substantially similar to Kamailio? — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello Daniel, You are right - I should have used "parts of the core" in my earlier e-mail. Some parts are BSD licences, some are of course GPLv2 (or later). Cheers, Henning -Original Message- From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:20 PM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List ; Henning Westerholt Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine Hello, there is some erroneous information that Kamailio core uses another, more permissive licence than GPLv2. It is actually GPLv2 (or newer) for most of its code, as you can note at the top of old files there. Probably the confusion came from the fact that is required since 2008 to make contributions to core under BSD, but because there was (and still is) a lot of prior GPLv2 code, all together, the core still has to follow the GPLv2 rules. One can extract parts of the core and those can be BSD, indeed. The requirement to make core (and a few other major modules, iirc, tm, sl, tls) contributions under BSD came practically from the issue with bundling GPL code with some other (maybe not fully compliant) OSS licenses such as it was the case of openssl license at that time. If one wants to add (valuable) GPL code can add it in a module and the core can get some hooks to call the code when needed. The rule tried to avoid future situations when some past developers are gone and we would need their agreement for packing core and main module with some libraries. Cheers, Daniel On 09.02.22 13:02, Henning Westerholt wrote: > Hello, > > This is also discussed in detail in the GPL FAQ [1]. Generally speaking - if > you combine "closely" GPL v2 and proprietary code, the result needs to be > also GPLv2. So, your example would not work from a licence point of view for > proprietary licensing. > > In the Kamailio case you could do the following: combine the core (which uses > another, more permissive licence) only with proprietary modules. This would > be ok from a licence point of view, but of course not really practical. > > Cheers, > > Henning > > > [1] > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggrega > tion > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – > https://gilawa.com > > -Original Message- > From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex > Balashov > Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 12:24 PM > To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > >> On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:40 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 9 Feb 2022, at 08:20, Juha Heinanen wrote: >>> >>> In case of SEMS and Kamailio the added value a company can provide >>> on the free source code is on how it is configured (Kamailio) or >>> what kind of applications have been written using it (SEMS). >>> >> Exactly. >> >> With Kamailio you can do almost anything in the configuration, especially >> now that we have KEMI. >> >> But there are still old-fashioned managers out there that think >> - they’re solution is UNIQUE >> - they have to modify the source and keep the changes >> - they have to write a kamailio module in C for their unique business >> logic >> >> In most cases all these assumptions are wrong. >> >> If you do modify the source or add your own module and distribute it, you >> are likely going to have GPL issues. Don’t go down that rabbit hole. > Since you did open the topic: I thought that custom Kamailio modules can be > exempt from this, provided they are truly self-contained modules and not more > invasive source code modifications, based on the theory of the > “loose-coupled” aggregate? > > I know this is a vague and risky idea, since ultimately someone has to make a > judgment about whether a Kamailio module meets the standard of > self-containment and loose coupling that the GPL has in mind. > > On the one hand, a custom module would be compiled into a separate ELF > reloadable object and loaded separately. On the other hand, it can hardly be > said to be an outside service communicating to the core program through > strictly confined channels such as pipes or sockets or RPC API endpoints, > instead practically sharing memory and a large number of data structures from > the core program or its other [GPL-licensed] modules. > > Still, a custom module is, in the Kamailio way of doing things, practically > self-contained as a matter of code. Modules under a proprietary license are, > from what I understand of the GPL, foreseen and permitted. > > Regardless, I do agree strongly that th
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, there is some erroneous information that Kamailio core uses another, more permissive licence than GPLv2. It is actually GPLv2 (or newer) for most of its code, as you can note at the top of old files there. Probably the confusion came from the fact that is required since 2008 to make contributions to core under BSD, but because there was (and still is) a lot of prior GPLv2 code, all together, the core still has to follow the GPLv2 rules. One can extract parts of the core and those can be BSD, indeed. The requirement to make core (and a few other major modules, iirc, tm, sl, tls) contributions under BSD came practically from the issue with bundling GPL code with some other (maybe not fully compliant) OSS licenses such as it was the case of openssl license at that time. If one wants to add (valuable) GPL code can add it in a module and the core can get some hooks to call the code when needed. The rule tried to avoid future situations when some past developers are gone and we would need their agreement for packing core and main module with some libraries. Cheers, Daniel On 09.02.22 13:02, Henning Westerholt wrote: > Hello, > > This is also discussed in detail in the GPL FAQ [1]. Generally speaking - if > you combine "closely" GPL v2 and proprietary code, the result needs to be > also GPLv2. So, your example would not work from a licence point of view for > proprietary licensing. > > In the Kamailio case you could do the following: combine the core (which uses > another, more permissive licence) only with proprietary modules. This would > be ok from a licence point of view, but of course not really practical. > > Cheers, > > Henning > > > [1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation > -- > Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ > Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com > > -Original Message- > From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex > Balashov > Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 12:24 PM > To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > > >> On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:40 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 9 Feb 2022, at 08:20, Juha Heinanen wrote: >>> >>> In case of SEMS and Kamailio the added value a company can provide on >>> the free source code is on how it is configured (Kamailio) or what >>> kind of applications have been written using it (SEMS). >>> >> Exactly. >> >> With Kamailio you can do almost anything in the configuration, especially >> now that we have KEMI. >> >> But there are still old-fashioned managers out there that think >> - they’re solution is UNIQUE >> - they have to modify the source and keep the changes >> - they have to write a kamailio module in C for their unique business >> logic >> >> In most cases all these assumptions are wrong. >> >> If you do modify the source or add your own module and distribute it, you >> are likely going to have GPL issues. Don’t go down that rabbit hole. > Since you did open the topic: I thought that custom Kamailio modules can be > exempt from this, provided they are truly self-contained modules and not more > invasive source code modifications, based on the theory of the > “loose-coupled” aggregate? > > I know this is a vague and risky idea, since ultimately someone has to make a > judgment about whether a Kamailio module meets the standard of > self-containment and loose coupling that the GPL has in mind. > > On the one hand, a custom module would be compiled into a separate ELF > reloadable object and loaded separately. On the other hand, it can hardly be > said to be an outside service communicating to the core program through > strictly confined channels such as pipes or sockets or RPC API endpoints, > instead practically sharing memory and a large number of data structures from > the core program or its other [GPL-licensed] modules. > > Still, a custom module is, in the Kamailio way of doing things, practically > self-contained as a matter of code. Modules under a proprietary license are, > from what I understand of the GPL, foreseen and permitted. > > Regardless, I do agree strongly that this is generally the wrong way to do > things, born first and foremost of a kind of grandiose delusion of “unique” > requirements or top-secret formulas. :-) > > — Alex > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - N
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, This is also discussed in detail in the GPL FAQ [1]. Generally speaking - if you combine "closely" GPL v2 and proprietary code, the result needs to be also GPLv2. So, your example would not work from a licence point of view for proprietary licensing. In the Kamailio case you could do the following: combine the core (which uses another, more permissive licence) only with proprietary modules. This would be ok from a licence point of view, but of course not really practical. Cheers, Henning [1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com -Original Message- From: sr-users On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 12:24 PM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine > On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:40 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: > > > >> On 9 Feb 2022, at 08:20, Juha Heinanen wrote: >> >> In case of SEMS and Kamailio the added value a company can provide on >> the free source code is on how it is configured (Kamailio) or what >> kind of applications have been written using it (SEMS). >> > Exactly. > > With Kamailio you can do almost anything in the configuration, especially now > that we have KEMI. > > But there are still old-fashioned managers out there that think > - they’re solution is UNIQUE > - they have to modify the source and keep the changes > - they have to write a kamailio module in C for their unique business > logic > > In most cases all these assumptions are wrong. > > If you do modify the source or add your own module and distribute it, you are > likely going to have GPL issues. Don’t go down that rabbit hole. Since you did open the topic: I thought that custom Kamailio modules can be exempt from this, provided they are truly self-contained modules and not more invasive source code modifications, based on the theory of the “loose-coupled” aggregate? I know this is a vague and risky idea, since ultimately someone has to make a judgment about whether a Kamailio module meets the standard of self-containment and loose coupling that the GPL has in mind. On the one hand, a custom module would be compiled into a separate ELF reloadable object and loaded separately. On the other hand, it can hardly be said to be an outside service communicating to the core program through strictly confined channels such as pipes or sockets or RPC API endpoints, instead practically sharing memory and a large number of data structures from the core program or its other [GPL-licensed] modules. Still, a custom module is, in the Kamailio way of doing things, practically self-contained as a matter of code. Modules under a proprietary license are, from what I understand of the GPL, foreseen and permitted. Regardless, I do agree strongly that this is generally the wrong way to do things, born first and foremost of a kind of grandiose delusion of “unique” requirements or top-secret formulas. :-) — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:40 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: > > > >> On 9 Feb 2022, at 08:20, Juha Heinanen wrote: >> >> In case of SEMS and Kamailio the added value a company can provide on >> the free source code is on how it is configured (Kamailio) or what kind >> of applications have been written using it (SEMS). >> > Exactly. > > With Kamailio you can do almost anything in the configuration, especially now > that we have KEMI. > > But there are still old-fashioned managers out there that think > - they’re solution is UNIQUE > - they have to modify the source and keep the changes > - they have to write a kamailio module in C for their unique business logic > > In most cases all these assumptions are wrong. > > If you do modify the source or add your own module and distribute it, you are > likely going to have GPL issues. Don’t go down that rabbit hole. Since you did open the topic: I thought that custom Kamailio modules can be exempt from this, provided they are truly self-contained modules and not more invasive source code modifications, based on the theory of the “loose-coupled” aggregate? I know this is a vague and risky idea, since ultimately someone has to make a judgment about whether a Kamailio module meets the standard of self-containment and loose coupling that the GPL has in mind. On the one hand, a custom module would be compiled into a separate ELF reloadable object and loaded separately. On the other hand, it can hardly be said to be an outside service communicating to the core program through strictly confined channels such as pipes or sockets or RPC API endpoints, instead practically sharing memory and a large number of data structures from the core program or its other [GPL-licensed] modules. Still, a custom module is, in the Kamailio way of doing things, practically self-contained as a matter of code. Modules under a proprietary license are, from what I understand of the GPL, foreseen and permitted. Regardless, I do agree strongly that this is generally the wrong way to do things, born first and foremost of a kind of grandiose delusion of “unique” requirements or top-secret formulas. :-) — Alex -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello, regarding selling copies and the source code fee, the quite extensive GPLv2 FAQ covers it extensively: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowDownloadFee Nobody than the buyer could request the source code, but each buyer can of course distribute the source code freely: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#DoesTheGPLRequireAvailabilityToPublic Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users On Behalf Of Daniel-Constantin Mierla Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2022 8:09 AM To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List ; Patrick Karton Subject: Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine GPL software can be sold without problems, there is no restriction on selling it, but the buyer can request the source code and it has to be provided (afaik, source code delivery could also have a price, but not exceeding the value of the binary form -- this remark must be validated with a lawyer). Nobody else than the buyer has the rights to request the source code. Cheers, Daniel On 08.02.22 21:36, Patrick Karton wrote: Thanks again Alex :). I will make further read about FOSS licensing. Using open source at large scale is relatively new for us. We have Law department so WE will discuss in more details about it. Thanks again. Le 8 févr. 2022 20:57, Alex Balashov <mailto:abalas...@evaristesys.com> a écrit : Then you should not have any problem using SEMS as an input into commercial services. :-) As a general rule, open-source licensing is not concerned with _how_ you can use the software, only how you distribute it and/or any modifications you make to it. Think, for example, about something like Linux, which you are likely also using. You are free to use Linux to make money. However, it is surprising that you are not familiar with the GPL (GNU General Public Licence), since it is all but ubiquitous and probably the most popular open-source licence out there. I would take the time to research it, get familiar with its basic premises, and, of course, consult a lawyer if you have any truly esoteric questions. — Alex > On Feb 8, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Patrick Karton > <mailto:patrickar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for explanation Alex. > > Im a service provider. > > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov > <mailto:abalas...@evaristesys.com> a écrit : > You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it means > “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) > > “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ > product, because it is free software. > > Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software > for service providers? > > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton > > <mailto:patrickar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Thank you very much for the response. > > > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per > > se". what is per se ? > > > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement > > and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. > > > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> On 9 Feb 2022, at 08:20, Juha Heinanen wrote: > > In case of SEMS and Kamailio the added value a company can provide on > the free source code is on how it is configured (Kamailio) or what kind > of applications have been written using it (SEMS). > Exactly. With Kamailio you can do almost anything in the configuration, especially now that we have KEMI. But there are still old-fashioned managers out there that think - they’re solution is UNIQUE - they have to modify the source and keep the changes - they have to write a kamailio module in C for their unique business logic In most cases all these assumptions are wrong. If you do modify the source or add your own module and distribute it, you are likely going to have GPL issues. Don’t go down that rabbit hole. /O __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Yes, you’re quite right. As I mentioned in my previous response, I was trying to keep the issue very simple for the OP, but perhaps I simplified too indulgently. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:15 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote: > > > >> 8 feb. 2022 kl. 17:51 skrev Alex Balashov : >> >> You do not need to purchase a licence to incorporate SEMS into a service >> platform to sell telephony to customers. You may not, however, sell SEMS per >> se. >> > That’s wrong. You may sell GPL-licensed software. But if you changed the > code, the GPL forces you to make the source of the code available to your > customers under GPL, should they request it. > > There are many boxes out there selling with Asterisk in it, with Asterisk > still under GPL. > > Only if you changed SEMS code and want to sell it under a non-GPL commercial > license you will need to discuss licensing with the license holders. > > /O >> That’s the very, very simple version. >> >> — >> Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. >> >>> On Feb 8, 2022, at 11:47 AM, Patrick Karton >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hello im using kamailio and rtpengine to build a custom SBC. >>> >>> i was using freeswitch as my b2bua but i noticed a lot of issues when cps >>> and simultaneous increased so i tried sems and i have better results. >>> >>> But i do not really understand sems license so i want to know if i can use >>> it. >>> >>> i read from sems github >>> >>> "It is licensed under dual >>> license terms, the GPL (v2+) and proprietary license. This >>> program is released under the GPL with the additional exemption >>> that compiling, linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed. >>> >>> For a license to use SEMS under non-GPL terms, please contact >>> FRAFOS GmbH at i...@frafos.com" >>> >>> so my question is if i want to use sems as b2bua with kamailio and >>> rtpengine and make profit of it do i need to purchase a license each time i >>> want to sell it to a customer ? >>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> __ >>> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >>> * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >>> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to >>> the sender! >>> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >>> * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> __ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the >> sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Yes, I was trying to keep it simple, but perhaps, as you say, at the cost of some accuracy. :-) Most laypeople’s understanding of what it means to sell software, in my experience, is to distribute it in binary form without offering the source, even upon request. This is what I meant to say was forbidden. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:10 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla > wrote: > > > GPL software can be sold without problems, there is no restriction on selling > it, but the buyer can request the source code and it has to be provided > (afaik, source code delivery could also have a price, but not exceeding the > value of the binary form -- this remark must be validated with a lawyer). > Nobody else than the buyer has the rights to request the source code. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > On 08.02.22 21:36, Patrick Karton wrote: >> Thanks again Alex :). I will make further read about FOSS licensing. >> >> Using open source at large scale is relatively new for us. >> >> We have Law department so WE will discuss in more details about it. >> >> Thanks again. >> >> Le 8 févr. 2022 20:57, Alex Balashov a écrit : >> Then you should not have any problem using SEMS as an input into commercial >> services. :-) As a general rule, open-source licensing is not concerned with >> _how_ you can use the software, only how you distribute it and/or any >> modifications you make to it. Think, for example, about something like >> Linux, which you are likely also using. You are free to use Linux to make >> money. >> >> However, it is surprising that you are not familiar with the GPL (GNU >> General Public Licence), since it is all but ubiquitous and probably the >> most popular open-source licence out there. I would take the time to >> research it, get familiar with its basic premises, and, of course, consult a >> lawyer if you have any truly esoteric questions. >> >> — Alex >> >> > On Feb 8, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Patrick Karton >> > wrote: >> > >> > Thanks for explanation Alex. >> > >> > Im a service provider. >> > >> > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov a écrit : >> > You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it >> > means “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) >> > >> > “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ >> > product, because it is free software. >> > >> > Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software >> > for service providers? >> > >> > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Alex, >> > > >> > > Thank you very much for the response. >> > > >> > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS >> > > per se". what is per se ? >> > > >> > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually >> > > annoucement and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from >> > > sems. >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC >> > >> > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) >> > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ >> > >> > __ >> > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to >> > the sender! >> > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> > >> > >> > __ >> > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to >> > the sender! >> > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> >> -- >> Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC >> >> Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) >> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ >> >> __ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the >> sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> >> >> >> >> __ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the >> sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com > www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
> 8 feb. 2022 kl. 17:51 skrev Alex Balashov : > > You do not need to purchase a licence to incorporate SEMS into a service > platform to sell telephony to customers. You may not, however, sell SEMS per > se. > That’s wrong. You may sell GPL-licensed software. But if you changed the code, the GPL forces you to make the source of the code available to your customers under GPL, should they request it. There are many boxes out there selling with Asterisk in it, with Asterisk still under GPL. Only if you changed SEMS code and want to sell it under a non-GPL commercial license you will need to discuss licensing with the license holders. /O > That’s the very, very simple version. > > — > Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > >> On Feb 8, 2022, at 11:47 AM, Patrick Karton wrote: >> >> >> Hello im using kamailio and rtpengine to build a custom SBC. >> >> i was using freeswitch as my b2bua but i noticed a lot of issues when cps >> and simultaneous increased so i tried sems and i have better results. >> >> But i do not really understand sems license so i want to know if i can use >> it. >> >> i read from sems github >> >> "It is licensed under dual >> license terms, the GPL (v2+) and proprietary license. This >> program is released under the GPL with the additional exemption >> that compiling, linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed. >> >> For a license to use SEMS under non-GPL terms, please contact >> FRAFOS GmbH at i...@frafos.com" >> >> so my question is if i want to use sems as b2bua with kamailio and rtpengine >> and make profit of it do i need to purchase a license each time i want to >> sell it to a customer ? >> >> >> Thanks. >> __ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the >> sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
GPL software can be sold without problems, there is no restriction on selling it, but the buyer can request the source code and it has to be provided (afaik, source code delivery could also have a price, but not exceeding the value of the binary form -- this remark must be validated with a lawyer). Nobody else than the buyer has the rights to request the source code. Cheers, Daniel On 08.02.22 21:36, Patrick Karton wrote: > Thanks again Alex :). I will make further read about FOSS licensing. > > Using open source at large scale is relatively new for us. > > We have Law department so WE will discuss in more details about it. > > Thanks again. > > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:57, Alex Balashov a écrit : > > Then you should not have any problem using SEMS as an input into > commercial services. :-) As a general rule, open-source licensing > is not concerned with _how_ you can use the software, only how you > distribute it and/or any modifications you make to it. Think, for > example, about something like Linux, which you are likely also > using. You are free to use Linux to make money. > > However, it is surprising that you are not familiar with the GPL > (GNU General Public Licence), since it is all but ubiquitous and > probably the most popular open-source licence out there. I would > take the time to research it, get familiar with its basic > premises, and, of course, consult a lawyer if you have any truly > esoteric questions. > > — Alex > > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Patrick Karton > wrote: > > > > Thanks for explanation Alex. > > > > Im a service provider. > > > > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov > a écrit : > > You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, > but it means “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) > > > > “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a > _software_ product, because it is free software. > > > > Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of > selling software for service providers? > > > > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > Thank you very much for the response. > > > > > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, > sell SEMS per se". what is per se ? > > > > > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and > eventually annoucement and ivr module. but thats all the > functionnality i want from sems. > > > > > > > -- > > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > > > __ > > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply > only to the sender! > > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > > > > __ > > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply > only to the sender! > > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply > only to the sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training - Online Feb 21-24, 2022 (America Timezone) * https://www.asipto.com/sw/kamailio-advanced-training-online/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Thanks again Alex :). I will make further read about FOSS licensing.Using open source at large scale is relatively new for us.We have Law department so WE will discuss in more details about it.Thanks again.Le 8 févr. 2022 20:57, Alex Balashov a écrit :Then you should not have any problem using SEMS as an input into commercial services. :-) As a general rule, open-source licensing is not concerned with _how_ you can use the software, only how you distribute it and/or any modifications you make to it. Think, for example, about something like Linux, which you are likely also using. You are free to use Linux to make money. However, it is surprising that you are not familiar with the GPL (GNU General Public Licence), since it is all but ubiquitous and probably the most popular open-source licence out there. I would take the time to research it, get familiar with its basic premises, and, of course, consult a lawyer if you have any truly esoteric questions. — Alex > On Feb 8, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > Thanks for explanation Alex. > > Im a service provider. > > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov a écrit : > You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it means “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) > > “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ product, because it is free software. > > Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software for service providers? > > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Thank you very much for the response. > > > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per se". what is per se ? > > > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. > > > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Then you should not have any problem using SEMS as an input into commercial services. :-) As a general rule, open-source licensing is not concerned with _how_ you can use the software, only how you distribute it and/or any modifications you make to it. Think, for example, about something like Linux, which you are likely also using. You are free to use Linux to make money. However, it is surprising that you are not familiar with the GPL (GNU General Public Licence), since it is all but ubiquitous and probably the most popular open-source licence out there. I would take the time to research it, get familiar with its basic premises, and, of course, consult a lawyer if you have any truly esoteric questions. — Alex > On Feb 8, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > Thanks for explanation Alex. > > Im a service provider. > > Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov a écrit : > You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it means > “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) > > “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ > product, because it is free software. > > Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software > for service providers? > > > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton > > wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Thank you very much for the response. > > > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per > > se". what is per se ? > > > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement > > and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. > > > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > > Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Thanks for explanation Alex.Im a service provider.Le 8 févr. 2022 20:14, Alex Balashov a écrit :You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it means “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ product, because it is free software. Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software for service providers? > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Thank you very much for the response. > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per se". what is per se ? > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. > -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
You can Google the meaning of “per se” for a richer explanation, but it means “as such” or “the thing itself”. :-) “Per se” in this context means that you cannot sell SEMS as a _software_ product, because it is free software. Are you a service provider, or are you in the business of selling software for service providers? > On Feb 8, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Thank you very much for the response. > > i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per > se". what is per se ? > > as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement > and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. > -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hi Alex, Thank you very much for the response. i did not understand your last phrase "You may not, however, sell SEMS per se". what is per se ? as i said i only want to use the sems sbc module and eventually annoucement and ivr module. but thats all the functionnality i want from sems. De : sr-users de la part de Alex Balashov Envoyé : mardi 8 février 2022 17:51 À : Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Objet : Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine You do not need to purchase a licence to incorporate SEMS into a service platform to sell telephony to customers. You may not, however, sell SEMS per se. That’s the very, very simple version. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. On Feb 8, 2022, at 11:47 AM, Patrick Karton wrote: Hello im using kamailio and rtpengine to build a custom SBC. i was using freeswitch as my b2bua but i noticed a lot of issues when cps and simultaneous increased so i tried sems and i have better results. But i do not really understand sems license so i want to know if i can use it. i read from sems github "It is licensed under dual license terms, the GPL (v2+) and proprietary license. This program is released under the GPL with the additional exemption that compiling, linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed. For a license to use SEMS under non-GPL terms, please contact FRAFOS GmbH at i...@frafos.com" so my question is if i want to use sems as b2bua with kamailio and rtpengine and make profit of it do i need to purchase a license each time i want to sell it to a customer ? Thanks. __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
You do not need to purchase a licence to incorporate SEMS into a service platform to sell telephony to customers. You may not, however, sell SEMS per se. That’s the very, very simple version. — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Feb 8, 2022, at 11:47 AM, Patrick Karton wrote: > > > Hello im using kamailio and rtpengine to build a custom SBC. > > i was using freeswitch as my b2bua but i noticed a lot of issues when cps and > simultaneous increased so i tried sems and i have better results. > > But i do not really understand sems license so i want to know if i can use it. > > i read from sems github > > "It is licensed under dual > license terms, the GPL (v2+) and proprietary license. This > program is released under the GPL with the additional exemption > that compiling, linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed. > > For a license to use SEMS under non-GPL terms, please contact > FRAFOS GmbH at i...@frafos.com" > > so my question is if i want to use sems as b2bua with kamailio and rtpengine > and make profit of it do i need to purchase a license each time i want to > sell it to a customer ? > > > Thanks. > __ > Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions > * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the > sender! > Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: > * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
[SR-Users] SEMS license with kamailio and rtpengine
Hello im using kamailio and rtpengine to build a custom SBC. i was using freeswitch as my b2bua but i noticed a lot of issues when cps and simultaneous increased so i tried sems and i have better results. But i do not really understand sems license so i want to know if i can use it. i read from sems github "It is licensed under dual license terms, the GPL (v2+) and proprietary license. This program is released under the GPL with the additional exemption that compiling, linking, and/or using OpenSSL is allowed. For a license to use SEMS under non-GPL terms, please contact FRAFOS GmbH at i...@frafos.com" so my question is if i want to use sems as b2bua with kamailio and rtpengine and make profit of it do i need to purchase a license each time i want to sell it to a customer ? Thanks. __ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions * sr-users@lists.kamailio.org Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: * https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
