السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته May peace and Allah Mercy and Blessings be upon you,
Chris, Thank you, now I understand. "My sentence was simply a tag line to the response given to you by Matthias, and meant to qualify his statement. Where is the difficulty in your comprehension?" I apologize if I did understand you wrong, I think that's because my English has a limit. "Where is the problem in allowing people access to the source code of something that you yourself got for nothing, and crediting those responsible? Please enlighten me/us?" Well, the problem is that I don't see including the source code in a commercial application makes sense or professional, if I intended to release my product as open source, this would be convenient, at least in my opinion. "There is really very little different between MIT" Would you be kind enough to tell me that difference in brief, as I said my English is not that good to read and fully understand the licences, I'm also not a lawyer or so. Bettawfeeq to you too, (smile). Thank you. 2009/7/27 Chris Pugh <[email protected]> 2009/7/27 Ahmad ElDardiry <[email protected]>: > > السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته > > May peace and Allah Mercy and Blessings be upon you, > > > > Chris Pugh, > > "...else you are breaking the stringent terms of the GPL" > > > Why do you think I'm asking these questions here for ? > > My sentence was simply a tag line to the response given to you > by Matthias, and meant to qualify his statement. Where is the > difficulty in your comprehension? > > The GPL is, in effect, a Copyright License. When Matthas created > SWFTools, he made it Open Source, releasing under the GPL, i.e. > showing anyone who was interested, how the program binaries do > what they do. He still retains Copyright on his own idea and code. > > Redistribute and use the GPL's binaries from the SWFTools distribution > in your own work, and you *must* make the source code that created > them available to the user. How that source code is actually made > available depends on the version of the GPL you re complying with. > > > I don't know much about GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT ... but I'm also willing to > > respect them. If including these binaries only would break the license, > then > > insha' Allah I won't use them. > > Dear oh dear! Why so uptight? ;o) Where is the problem in allowing > people access to the source code of something that you yourself got > for nothing, and crediting those responsible? Please enlighten me/us? > Are you perchance worried that customers may not buy your wares, > when they realize the major components are GPL'd?? > > > There is "sswf" as an alternative to me, which may have a more suitable > > license for me (MIT), I'm not sure yet, but I find SWFTools much more > easy > > to use, so I thought I check here first.t need > > There is really very little different between MIT and GPL: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License. > > for example, you have to include the respective License Agreement with your > own presumably intended to be proprietary ( closed source ) software! > > > Mathiass, you mentioned this in other thread: > > > > "You don't need licensing for that- You're free to use the swf output > files > > for whatever you see fit." > > > > and that's exactly what I want to do, is this legal ? > > With respect, that is an entirely different point. You don't need > permission > to use them, nut you should still make the source code that created them > available in some form to your 'customers' > > Bettawfeeq بالتوفيق! > > Ma’a salama, > > > Chris. > > > -- لا إله إلا الله There is no god but Allah أحمد Ahmad http://www.shagarah.com http://www.arabicode.com -- السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته May peace and Allah Mercy and Blessings be upon you, لا إله إلا الله There is no god but Allah أحمد Ahmad http://www.shagarah.com http://www.arabicode.com
