wood burning stoves*
The moose likes General Computing and the fly likes GPL, LGPL, Apache, BSD ... Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Engineering » General Computing
Bookmark "GPL, LGPL, Apache, BSD ... " Watch "GPL, LGPL, Apache, BSD ... " New topic
Author

GPL, LGPL, Apache, BSD ...

Tonny Tssagovic
Ranch Hand

Joined: Dec 30, 2003
Posts: 226
I confess. I never really read all the law jargon in licenses. My idea is that GPL is open source stuff that allows you to use the source (link to a lib for example) if your software will be open source, and here comes LGPL that lets you link to it without making your source open, and can sell it to whome you want.
Now I have seen a commercial code that uses a GPL licensed library, and no the code is not open, and don�t think that library had another commercial friendly licence.
1 ) Are these guys cheating?
2) What licence permits e to use the code, and let me sell it without making my code open source?
3) Can I use the licence itself in my licence. That is copy some stuff, like �marchability and AS is blah blah that I find in all lisences, or do I need a lawyer to write my licence?
Any clues/Ideas? Am I wrong?
Thanks in advance!
PS: I like open source, but just can not make my �customer�s� application open source, nor give them the source (otherwise they will never come back to me
Jeroen Wenting
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 12, 2000
Posts: 5093
1) possibly. Though it is possible they got a special license for services rendered to the project (like donating effort and code, or hardware, etc. etc.).
2) LGPL would do that, as would the Apache license. GPL would not, don't know about BSD.
3) I'd check out the legalese for sure. Using an existing license as inspiration for your own is a good starting point but if you're not a lawyer and you want a watertight license you'd better hire an expert. Note the GPL has NEVER stood up in court yet (but then, it's never been tested to the best of my limited knowledge).
You can give customers the source, no problem. Just make sure they can't make heads nor tails of it without the technical and design docs and then withhold those


42
Lasse Koskela
author
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 23, 2002
Posts: 11962
    
    5
Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
You can give customers the source, no problem. Just make sure they can't make heads nor tails of it without the technical and design docs and then withhold those
In other words, decompile the "customer source" from obfuscated .class files. Now that's what I call customer service


Author of Test Driven (2007) and Effective Unit Testing (2013) [Blog] [HowToAskQuestionsOnJavaRanch]
Jeroen Wenting
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 12, 2000
Posts: 5093
Originally posted by Lasse Koskela:
In other words, decompile the "customer source" from obfuscated .class files. Now that's what I call customer service

Hadn't thought of that. Was thinking more along the lines of including copious dependencies on external libraries which are not included but are listed in the documentation
Tonny Tssagovic
Ranch Hand

Joined: Dec 30, 2003
Posts: 226
Originally posted by Lasse Koskela:
In other words, decompile the "customer source" from obfuscated .class files. Now that's what I call customer service

Wow, you are talking about a real service; decompiling the code will make it even more readable, at least the decompiler will make proper identation.
actually decompiling code of very small applications like midlets might give u a good idea about the disign APIs used for UI and so on.
 
 
subject: GPL, LGPL, Apache, BSD ...