Re: [Haskell-cafe] [Cabal-devel] Cabal && license combinations
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Chris Smith
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 08:59 +0100, Ketil Malde wrote:
I disagree - the linked executable must, but not the wrapper by itself. It's source code, i.e. text, thus a creative work, and therefore covered by copyright - on its own.
You're certainly right from a legal standpoint. But being right doesn't actually matter. The instant anyone actually compiles an application that uses your library, however indirectly, they are bound by the terms of the underlying library as well. So your bindings are effectively covered by the underlying license anyway (unless you're choosing a license for the sake of people who will never produce any usable end result...)
The vast majority of Open Source licenses in use only restrict the publication of the work or derived works, not compilation. So no, the instant of compilation is not when the transitive dependencies kick in, it is the publication of compiled binaries, which in my mind is a pretty specialized case. Antoine
On 10 Feb 2011, at 17:38, Antoine Latter wrote:
So no, the instant of compilation is not when the transitive dependencies kick in, it is the publication of compiled binaries, which in my mind is a pretty specialized case.
This is possibly the most important point to emphasise, of which many people seem unaware. If you expect to receive an open source application from someone else as source code, and build it yourself, then almost by the definition of Open Source, you are already in compliance with all licences. It is only those, comparatively few, people who build binaries and give them to other people *as binaries* who even need to think about licensing issues. Regards, Malcolm
participants (2)
-
Antoine Latter -
Malcolm Wallace