-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Could I use Boost in program under GPL? Regards. - -- Linux user: #376500 (patrz http://counter.li.org/) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCTuvOTCh1hBPsbHURA3shAJ4hncUNBBtoM/V0w8501V3IQE51EwCfUjzJ lxP2qbr+XskDCWmhussuxSU= =uJJp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:00:31 +0200, Uzytkownik wrote
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
Could I use Boost in program under GPL? Regards.
Yes. This answer is iroinically in the license FAQ describing the difference between the boost license and the GPL...
The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license your own code under any terms you like. Jeff
Could I use Boost in program under GPL? Regards.
Yes. This answer is iroinically in the license FAQ describing the difference between the boost license and the GPL...
The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license your own code under any terms you like.
Jeff
Is there an issue that the GPL code would 'virally' infect the instance of the boost code in the combined source such that the boost code being redistributed would need to have the same (ie additional) restrictions as the GPL. Someone is free to also get Boost code directly from Boost and not have these restrictions, but does the Boost code allow a user to place further restrictions on the derived work? Paul (not a lawyer, and always confused by licenses)
Paul Baxter wrote:
Could I use Boost in program under GPL? Regards.
Yes. This answer is iroinically in the license FAQ describing the difference between the boost license and the GPL...
The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license your own code under any terms you like.
Jeff
Is there an issue that the GPL code would 'virally' infect the instance of the boost code in the combined source such that the boost code being redistributed would need to have the same (ie additional) restrictions as the GPL.
Someone is free to also get Boost code directly from Boost and not have these restrictions, but does the Boost code allow a user to place further restrictions on the derived work?
Paul (not a lawyer, and always confused by licenses)
I can or I cannot? If I understand you I cannot. but I'm not sure I understand. Regards. -- Linux user: #376500 (see http://counter.li.org/)
Is there an issue that the GPL code would 'virally' infect the instance of the boost code in the combined source such that the boost code being redistributed would need to have the same (ie additional) restrictions as the GPL.
Theoretically, perhaps, in Practice no. Consider this: You want to create a Product (lets call it P) it consists of three parts: Part Y - your own Code (i.e. you hold the copyright to this Part.) Part B - the Boost Library. (Has the Boost License) Part G - Some Code which is GPL Licensed. So the question (of the OP) is, what license does P stand under? Boost says: We don't care, use whatever you like. GPL says use GPL. So P has to be licensed under the GPL. So is the license of part B "infected" by G (for this Instance)? (Theoretically) Yes. (and ONLY for this Instance, the original is never modified)
Someone is free to also get Boost code directly from Boost and not have these restrictions, but does the Boost code allow a user to place further restrictions on the derived work?
Is this a problem? No. The Boost License allows this.
So now everyone who uses this Instance of Boost would have to use the GPL? Theoretically. In practice, how can you tell which instance of Boost someone uses? So no, everybody is still free to use Boost however he wants to.
Paul (not a lawyer, and always confused by licenses)
Fabio, also not a lawyer.
Fracassi@t-online.de wrote(a):
Is there an issue that the GPL code would 'virally' infect the instance of the boost code in the combined source such that the boost code being redistributed would need to have the same (ie additional) restrictions as the GPL.
Theoretically, perhaps, in Practice no.
Consider this: You want to create a Product (lets call it P) it consists of three parts: Part Y - your own Code (i.e. you hold the copyright to this Part.) Part B - the Boost Library. (Has the Boost License) Part G - Some Code which is GPL Licensed.
So the question (of the OP) is, what license does P stand under? Boost says: We don't care, use whatever you like. GPL says use GPL.
So P has to be licensed under the GPL. So is the license of part B "infected" by G (for this Instance)? (Theoretically) Yes. (and ONLY for this Instance, the original is never modified)
Simple answer: yes or no? I understand yes, but I'm not sure and, for me, details doesn't matter for me. Regards. -- Linux user: #376500 (see http://counter.li.org/)
Uzytkownik
Simple answer: yes or no? I understand yes, but I'm not sure and, for me, details doesn't matter for me.
If you really want a simple answer, the only responsible thing for any of us to say is "ask a lawyer." None of us are lawyers and we can only describe our amateur understanding of the legal issues. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Is there an issue that the GPL code would 'virally' infect the instance of the boost code in the combined source such that the boost code being redistributed would need to have the same (ie additional) restrictions as the GPL.
They can place whatever restrictions they want on *their code*, including I guess any patches they may make to Boost, but those restrictions apply only to their additions / modifications, not to the original Boost source. John.
participants (7)
-
David Abrahams -
Fracassi＠t-online.de -
Jeff Garland -
Joao Abecasis -
John Maddock -
Paul Baxter -
Uzytkownik