Once I created web2py 1.0 I registered both copyright and trademark. I paid for them. All web2py contributors sign a contributors agreement which gives me permissions to use the code as I see fit (and they also retain full rights on the contributed code), independently on the GPL.
This means I can release the code under GPL, I can change the license, I can add licenses, etc. For example I offer the "commercial exception" which allows you to distribute your apps with official web2py binaries. That is not compatible with the GPL but I can do it (it is an example of dual license). If a user needs something that is incompatible with the GPL, I can offer a customized license (although this never came up so far). You need to make a distinction. I am not claiming thatm for other frameworks which are GPL, software developed by with framework is not bound by the GPL. I am not making any statement about the validity of GPL. I am making a specific statement about web2py and I can do so because I have more rights than GPL grants because I am not bound by the GPL myself. I have full copyright. The web2py license says that applications built with web2py (.w2p apps) are not derivative work and GPL does not apply. Instead, if you build a derivative framework or if you use Flask and import dal.py, than GPL applies. Again, this is not a statement about the GPL, this is the web2py license. If you feel that the web2py license is not clean enough in this regard, that can be rephrased better. Massimo On Dec 12, 4:07 pm, VP <[email protected]> wrote: > While I don't necessarily advocate for changing web2py's license, I > think it's important to clarify the issues surrounding the license so > people are clear. > > The question is "can a web2py app be not GPL when the framework is > GPL?". I don't think it's as clear cut as someone might suggest. At > least it is controversial in a similar way as using GPL libraries or > linking to GPL code > (ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Linking_and_d...) > > Clearly an app developed by web2py framework is separate from the > framework, but at the same time, it cannot run without using the > framework. Especially when the app is compiled, it could be > considered a case of "static linking" (??). > > The other issue is even if this scenario isn't quite kosher with > respect to how GPL works, but if web2py (Massimo) explicitly permits > it to be non-GPL, will that still be okay? > > I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I think it is quite important > for people what are interested in developing commercial apps using > web2py.
