[quote="santiagoroza"]On 3/2/07, ced <forum> wrote: > > Cédric Krier > Tiny Belgium >
btw you seem to be tiny sprl staff, which reminds me of another thing: if the company decides not to enforce the gpl, ie not to sue people even if they break the license, well those people would be theoretically "safe", since the only party with the right to sue in copyright matters is the copyright holder. but that wouldn't mean that people wouldn't be breaking the license. and that wouldn't mean that external contributors couldn't sue the infringing party for the gpl code they added, unless you're requiring full copyright attribution for contributors (in that case, tiny sprl would be the only copyright holder for all mainline code). [/quote] After reviewing the GPL myself, and based upon the fact that a module that inherits from GPL'd code and/or interacts closely (i.e., shared data structures, etc) must also be GPL, it would not be possible to release a module for TinyERP in binary only form. However, I do believe that it would be good for the TinyERP ecosystem if vendors were permitted to market and sell commercial modules, with or without source. I think the only way this could be done is if the license were changed from GPL to a derivative that explicitly permits closed source derivative works, where the derivation is limited to inheritance of the object relational model, and other stuff that's neccessary to implement a module. But I'm not a lawyer. I hope Tiny does speak with a laywer and clears this up. ------------------------ --phil _______________________________________________ Tinyerp-users mailing list http://tiny.be/mailman/listinfo/tinyerp-users
