Re: Fw: Question about GPL (semi off topic)
[email protected] Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:35:05 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.enhydra.barracuda.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 00818FBE88257013_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Here is my take. Again, I'm not a lawyer....
Let's assume that "By using the MySql driver, your app comes under the GPL
so you need to abide by the license."
Then they are saying
1. You can GPL your code, in which case you are fulfilling the GPL
license.
2. If you are giving away your services for free, then they are
giving you an exception. (not specified in the licensing page and not
specified as part of the GPL)
3. If you don't want to GPL your code, and you are charging money for
the service,
then they are willing to sell you a license to the MySQL
libraries and application under a "non-GPL" license.
(They can do this if they own the copyright to all the code -
rewrote contributions or received an assignment of copyright for
contributed code)
Is option 3 above still open source? Yes it is. With the license you
purchase, you will get the source as well....
So comes the "Free as in speech, not free as in beer" .....
You can get the code (Freedom to modify to your liking) But it's
not free ( costs money to get beer).
Edward
Christian Cryder <[email protected]>
06/01/2005 08:44 AM
Please respond to christian.cryder
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Re: Fw: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off
topic)
Just an FYI... Here's the response I got from the MySQL guys.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matt Fredrickson <[email protected]>
Date: May 18, 2005 4:12 PM
Subject: MySQL Inquiry
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Hi Christian,
Thank you for your interest in MySQL. If you are an ASP and your
application is not open source, we will need to arrange some sort of
arrangement. Do you pay you a service or subscription fee? How is
that structured?
If you are not an ASP and you are simply letting the public access
your website, licensing is not required and you are fine with the GPL.
Sincerely,
Matt Fredrickson
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So from their perspective, if you are an ASP (which we consider ourselves
to be), you must either GPL your app -OR- pay them a license fee. Since we
aren't inclined to do either of those, MySQL won't be an option for us.
What is not clear to me is how they are reading the GPL to arrive at this
conclusion. What is clear to me is that they evidently feel they have a
legal basis for their position, so it seems fairly risky (to me) to simply
bank on my own interpretation of the license here.
If this is in fact the case, it would seem to have significant
implications for any ASP models using GPL code - what they seem to be
saying is that it doesn't matter whether you extend or even redistribute
the code (we don't do either). What matters is that you are "a for-profit
business is using the code in a centrally hosted application which their
customers can access."
Anyway, just thought I'd share our findings...
Christian
[email protected] wrote:
Hi Christian,
1. If you are not distributing GPL code, you have no GPL issues (But see
#4 below)
From the http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html, Section 0,
Paragraph 2:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are
not covered by this License; they
are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not
restricted, and the output from the Program
is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the
Program (independent of having been made
by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the
Program does.
2. Internal distribution is NOT distribution
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution
Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or
company "distribution"?
No, in that case the organization is just making the
copies for itself. As a consequence,
a company or other organization can develop a modified
version and install that version
through its own facilities, without giving the staff
permission to release that modified version to outsiders.
However, when the organization transfers copies to
other organizations or individuals, that is distribution.
In particular, providing copies to contractors for use
off-site is distribution.
Even if not, you only have to provide the source to the people who
has obtained the executable.
They can't ask for the source if they don't have the exe.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy
If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I
demand he give me a copy?
No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute
copies of the program if he chooses to do so.
He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that
is what he chooses
3. There were some issue about the output of the application
FAQ:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL
In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL
too?
Only when the program copies part of itself into the output.
4. Here is where you may be in trouble.... It says you are ok. but in
the next paragraph it says you may not be.....
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods
A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a
web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?
The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it
without ever distributing it to others.
What this company is doing is a special case of that.
Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.
It is essential for people to have the freedom to make
modifications and use them privately,
without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting
the program on a server machine
for the public to talk to is hardly "private" use, so it
would be legitimate to require release of the
source code in that special case. We are thinking about doing
something like this in
GPL version 3, but we don't have precise wording in mind yet.
In the mean time, you might want to use the Affero GPL for
programs designed for network server use.
All of the above is really a secondary question.
The real question is does you program come under the GPL just because you
use the MySql jdbc driver.
Under the GPL, If your program uses a GPL library, then your program
becomes subject to the GPL (the reason for the LGPL, the Lesser GPL)
A. So the driver is under the GPL. If I make changes to the driver, I
have to release the changes to the driver.
B. If I use the driver, Is that like linking to the library? and comes
under the GPL.
C. Driver is not a library, and so my application is not subject to the
GPL.
So back to the GPL FAQ's
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins
Seems to suggest that only way option C would apply is if an exec or fork
is used to access/invoke the driver
Finally, given that MySQL went through the effort to change their Driver
license from LGPL to GPL
(to "more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should buy a
commercial license ")
would suggest that the applications would come under the GPL
http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html
Previously, the MySQL client libraries were licensed under the
LGPL (the Lesser General Public License)
and now they use the GPL (the General Public License). What
prompted this change?
MySQL's goal is to provide all its software under a free
software/open source license. The change from the
LGPL to the GPL for the client libraries was made in 2001 during
the development of MySQL 4.0 to help MySQL AB
more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should
buy a commercial license ...
In Conclusion,
My opinion (I'm not a lawyer) is that if you use the MySQL driver, your
application becomes subject to the GPL license.
Given that the Barracuda is under the LGPL, no real issues with the
application.
So only issue is #4 above.... Using the application on a public web site
**MIGHT** be considered distribution in the future ...
Edward
Christian Cryder <[email protected]>
05/13/2005 11:54 AM
Please respond to christian.cryder
To: BarracudaMVC <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off topic)
Hey, I am researching open source db's on Linux right now, looking
primarily at Postgress (BSD) vs. MySQL (GPL), and I am just wondering
about licensing issues. My understanding is that if you are simply _using_
a GPL'd product (like a db), rather than actually modiying or bundling it,
GPL wouldn't apply to your code. But the MySQL site seems kind of
ambiguous in how they describe it.
So to put it specfically - proprietary server based applications (ie.
vertical solutions) that use Barracuda, Tomcat, etc. and simply
store/retrieve data in a GPL DB would NOT be subject to GPL. Right?
Anyone know of any resources out there that would explicitly confirm (or
deny!) that understanding?
--
Christian
Christian Cryder
Internet Architect, ATMReports.com
"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"
http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com
--
Christian
Christian Cryder
Internet Architect, ATMReports.com
"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"
http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com
--=_alternative 00818FBE88257013_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Here is my take. Again, I'm not
a lawyer....</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Let's assume that "By using the
MySql driver, your app comes under the GPL so you need to abide by the
license."</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Then they are saying</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> 1. You can GPL your
code, in which case you are fulfilling the GPL license.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> 2. If you are giving
away your services for free, then they are giving you an exception. (not
specified in the licensing page and not specified as part of the GPL)</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> 3. If you don't
want to GPL your code, and you are charging money for the service, </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> then
they are willing to sell you a license to the MySQL libraries and application
under a "non-GPL" license.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> (They
can do this if they own the copyright to all the code - rewrote contributions
or received an assignment of copyright for contributed code)</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Is option 3 above still
open source? Yes it is. With the license you purchase, you
will get the source as well....</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> So comes the "Free
as in speech, not free as in beer" ..... </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> You can get the
code (Freedom to modify to your liking) But it's not free ( costs
money to get beer).</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Edward</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Christian Cryder <[email protected]></b></font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">06/01/2005 08:44 AM</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to christian.cryder</font>
<td><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> To:
[email protected]</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> cc:
</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> Subject:
Re: Fw: [barracuda] Question about GPL
(semi off topic)</font></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Just an FYI... Here's the response I got from the MySQL
guys.</font>
<br><font size=3><tt>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
From: Matt Fredrickson </tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u><[email protected]></u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt><br>
Date: May 18, 2005 4:12 PM<br>
Subject: MySQL Inquiry<br>
To: </tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u>"[email protected]"</u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt>
</tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u><[email protected]></u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt><br>
<br>
<br>
Hi Christian,<br>
<br>
Thank you for your interest in MySQL. If you are an ASP and your<br>
application is not open source, we will need to arrange some sort of<br>
arrangement. Do you pay you a service or subscription fee? How
is<br>
that structured?<br>
<br>
If you are not an ASP and you are simply letting the public access<br>
your website, licensing is not required and you are fine with the GPL.<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
Matt Fredrickson</tt></font>
<br><font size=3>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
So from their perspective, if you are an ASP (which we consider ourselves
to be), you must either GPL your app -OR- pay them a license fee. Since
we aren't inclined to do either of those, MySQL won't be an option for
us.<br>
<br>
What is not clear to me is how they are reading the GPL to arrive at this
conclusion. What is clear to me is that they evidently feel they have a
legal basis for their position, so it seems fairly risky (to me) to simply
bank on my own interpretation of the license here.<br>
<br>
If this is in fact the case, it would seem to have significant implications
for any ASP models using GPL code - what they seem to be saying is that
it doesn't matter whether you extend or even redistribute the code (we
don't do either). What matters is that you are "a for-profit business
is using the code in a centrally hosted application which their customers
can access."<br>
<br>
Anyway, just thought I'd share our findings...<br>
Christian<br>
</font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><u>[email protected]</u></font></a><font size=3>
wrote: </font>
<br><font size=3><br>
Hi Christian, <br>
<br>
1. If you are not distributing GPL code, you have no GPL issues (But
see #4 below) <br>
From the </font><a href=http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html><font size=3 color=blue><u>http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html</u></font></a><font size=3>,
Section 0, Paragraph 2: <br>
<br>
Activities other than copying, distribution
and modification are not covered by this License; they <br>
are outside its scope. The act of running the
Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program <br>
is covered only if its contents constitute
a work based on the Program (independent of having been made <br>
by running the Program). Whether that is true
depends on what the Program does. <br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
2. Internal distribution is NOT distribution</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Is making and using multiple copies within
one organization or company "distribution"?</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
No,
in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As
a consequence, <br>
a company or other
organization can develop a modified version and install that version</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
through its own
facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified
version to outsiders.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
However,
when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals,
that is distribution. <br>
In particular,
providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution. </font><font size=3><br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Even if not, you only have to provide the source to
the people who has obtained the executable. </font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
They can't ask for the source if they don't have the
exe.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered
program, can I demand he give me a copy?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
No. The GPL gives him permission
to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so.
<br>
He also has the right not to
redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses</font><font size=3>
<br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
3. There were some issue about the output of the application</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
FAQ: </font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
In what cases is the output of a GPL program
covered by the GPL too?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Only when the program copies part of
itself into the output.</font><font size=3> <br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
4. Here is where you may be in trouble.... It says you are
ok. but in the next paragraph it says you may not be.....</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
A company is running a modified version of
a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their
modified sources?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
The GPL permits anyone to make
a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. <br>
What this company is doing is
a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release
the modified sources.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
It is essential for people to
have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately,</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
without ever publishing those
modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine <br>
for the public to talk to is
hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require release
of the <br>
source code in that special case.
We are thinking about doing something like this in <br>
GPL version 3, but we don't have
precise wording in mind yet.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
In the mean time, you might want
to use the Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use. </font><font size=3><br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
All of the above is really a secondary question. </font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
The real question is does you program come under the GPL just because you
use the MySql jdbc driver.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Under the GPL, If your program uses a GPL library, then your program becomes
subject to the GPL (the reason for the LGPL, the Lesser GPL)</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
A. So the driver is under the GPL. If I make changes to the
driver, I have to release the changes to the driver.</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
B. If I use the driver, Is that like linking to the library? and
comes under the GPL.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
C. Driver is not a library, and so my application is not subject
to the GPL.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
So back to the GPL FAQ's</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins</u></font></a><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Seems to suggest that only way option C would apply is if an exec or fork
is used to access/invoke the driver</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Finally, given that MySQL went through the effort to change their Driver
license from LGPL to GPL <br>
(to "more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should
buy a commercial license ") <br>
would suggest that the applications would come under the GPL</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><a href=http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Previously, the MySQL client libraries were
licensed under the LGPL (the Lesser General Public License) <br>
and now they use the GPL (the General Public
License). What prompted this change?</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
MySQL's goal is to provide all its software
under a free software/open source license. The change from the <br>
LGPL to the GPL for the client libraries was
made in 2001 during the development of MySQL 4.0 to help MySQL AB <br>
more easily differentiate between a proprietary
user who should buy a commercial license ...</font><font size=3> <br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
In Conclusion, <br>
My opinion (I'm not a lawyer) is that if you use the MySQL driver, your
application becomes subject to the GPL license.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Given that the Barracuda is under the LGPL, no real issues with the application.</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
So only issue is #4 above.... Using the application on a public web
site **MIGHT** be considered distribution in the future ...</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Edward</font><font size=3><br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=2%>
<td width=44%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Christian Cryder </b></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><b><u><[email protected]></u></b></font></a><font size=3>
</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/13/2005 11:54 AM</font><font size=3>
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br>
Please respond to christian.cryder</font><font size=3> </font>
<td width=52%><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br>
To: BarracudaMVC
</font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><[email protected]></u></font></a><font size=3>
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br>
cc: </font><font size=3>
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: [barracuda]
Question about GPL (semi off topic)</font></table>
<br><font size=3><br>
<br>
<br>
Hey, I am researching open source db's on Linux right now, looking primarily
at Postgress (BSD) vs. MySQL (GPL), and I am just wondering about licensing
issues. My understanding is that if you are simply _using_ a GPL'd product
(like a db), rather than actually modiying or bundling it, GPL wouldn't
apply to your code. But the MySQL site seems kind of ambiguous in how they
describe it.<br>
<br>
So to put it specfically - proprietary server based applications (ie. vertical
solutions) that use Barracuda, Tomcat, etc. and simply store/retrieve data
in a GPL DB would NOT be subject to GPL. Right? <br>
<br>
Anyone know of any resources out there that would explicitly confirm (or
deny!) that understanding? <br>
-- </font>
<p><font size=3>Christian </font>
<p>
<table width=100%>
<tr>
<td width=100%>
<hr>
<tr>
<td><font size=3 face="Arial">Christian Cryder<br>
Internet Architect, </font><a href=http://atmreports.com/><font size=3 color=blue face="Arial"><u>ATMReports.com</u></font></a><font size=3>
</font>
<tr>
<td>
<hr>
<tr>
<td>
<div align=center><font size=3><i>"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just
not today"</i></font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br>
</u></font><a href=http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com/><font size=2 color=blue><i><u>http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com</u></i></font></a></div></table>
<br><font size=3><br>
</font>
<p><font size=3><br>
</font>
<br><font size=3>-- </font>
<p><font size=3>Christian</font>
<p>
<table width=100%>
<tr>
<td width=100%>
<hr>
<tr>
<td><font size=3 face="Arial">Christian Cryder<br>
Internet Architect, </font><a href=http://atmreports.com/><font size=3 color=blue face="Arial"><u>ATMReports.com</u></font></a>
<tr>
<td>
<hr>
<tr>
<td>
<div align=center><font size=3><i>"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just
not today"</i></font><font size=3 color=blue><i><u><br>
</u></i></font><a href=http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com/><font size=2 color=blue><i><u>http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com</u></i></font></a></div></table>
<br>
<br>
--=_alternative 00818FBE88257013_=--