Bundling things that are non-GPL together in an installer with things that are GPL is not a violation of the GPL. It's a violation only if you make a single program by linking non-GPL code with GPL code. XBoard and WinBoard talk to chess engines (etc.) through pipes, so there is no licensing problem using them with non-GPL software.
See: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation You do generally need to make sure that you have permission to redistribute things, and if you bundle a lot of stuff together, your bundle is effectively bound by the most restrictive license. For instance, if you put a "free for all non-commercial purposes" font in the bundle, then maybe it's not OK for anyone to include that bundle on a CD that is sold, not even as an extra add-in. (Generally the "free for non-commercial purposes" type of license is a bad thing, since it's not well defined what a "commercial purpose" is.) On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:37:59 +0200, "h.g. muller" <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a question on what we can bundle with WinBoard in an installer > package, and what not. > > I noticed that the previous installer package (for 4.2.7b) we included > Crafty. Now Crafty, although open source, is not GPL'd, and in fact > has a license that is incompatible with the GPL. Isn't it a violation of > the GPL to bundle software that puts restrictions on the use of its code > together with WinBoard? > > If not, then how about bundling it with software that is not open source > at all? > > And how about Chess fonts? There are many fonts listed as "freeware" > on the site http://www.enpassant.dk/chess/fonteng.htm . Can such > freeware be included? The Chess-font downloads are only 20-30 KB, > and if an installer is good for anything, it is good for making sure any > fonts are properly installed. How about a font of that is said to be > "free for all non-commercil purposes", such as the font at > http://www.kaiwan.hk/xqfont/english/index.htm#notes ? I suppose we > can bundle that with GPL stuff, as a font is not a program, and the > concept of "surce code" does not apply to a font. But is it legal to just > go ahead and do it, or would we need (signed) permission from the > creator of the font anyway? > > H.G. > > -- Tim Mann [email protected] http://tim-mann.org/
