License Compliance Question
DTAshley@aol.com
DTAshley@aol.com
Thu, 17 Apr 2003 15:17:00 EDT
--part1_131.1d3fcd7e.2bd057ac_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Michel,
OK, I reread your e-mail and also the LGPL.
It appears to me that since I'm not distributing the executable, I'm under no
obligations whatsoever. That is fine.
However, distributing the source can do no harm, so I'll follow your advice,
GPL all my source, and I'm all warm and fuzzy with that.
Thanks ...
Dave.
In a message dated 4/17/2003 8:30:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mbardiaux@peaktime.be writes:
> DTAshley@aol.com wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I joined the GMP list and made one post (a licensing question, e-mail
> >attached), but it does not seem to have made it through. Did anyone
> >receive it?
> >
> >Is the list working?
>
> Seems to be working, but *very* slowly. It can take several days before
> one recives an answer. Whether the butler did it... err... the majordomo
> does not run very often, or there are just not many list members, I
> dont know.
>
> Regarding the license: I would say you have an overly restrictive view
> of the LGPL.
>
> Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
>
> First, the LGPL (IMHO) places no restriction on *use*. Thus, using GMP
> in your web site does not require you to make sources (yours, or GMP)
> available. Also, for those who download the sources, "However, if you
> use these files with the GMP you will still have to honor whatever
> license terms apply": *use* is not restricted.
>
> LGPL does restrict *distribution*, especially in binary form. If you
> *did* distribute in binary, then (1) the GMP sources, including all
> modifications by you, have to be available (2) the application may *not*
> be statically linked, because that would prevent people from using it
> with another release of GMP.
>
> As for *your* sources, it may not be the best solution to declare them
> "I place no restrictions on the files which I'm making available (i.e.
> they are unlicensed)". You do not explicitly place them in the public
> domain, nor do you renounce your copyright, and "unlicensed" is
> ambiguous. Why not GPL them?
>
> >
> >Thanks, Dave.
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Subject:
> >License Compliance Question
> >From:
> >DTAshley@aol.com
> >Date:
> >Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:41:57 EDT
> >To:
> >gmp-discuss@swox.com
> >
> >
> >Hi Guys,
> >
> >While in a caffeine-induced psychosis, I authored the following three
> >web pages:
> >
> >http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/euclid_gcd.php
> >
> >http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/miller_rabin.php
> >
> >http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/pfact18digit.php
> >
> >Along with the GMP logo on each page, I linked to the source code that I
> >compiled and statically linked to the GMP, as well as source code for
> >the web pages.
> >
> >Am I am compliance with the license? Is making sure all source code is
> >available enough?
> >
> >If NO, what must I do to comply?
> >
> >Thanks, Dave.
>
>
> --
> Michel Bardiaux
> Peaktime Belgium S.A. Bd. du Souverain, 191 B-1160 Bruxelles
> Tel : +32 2 790.29.41
>
>
--part1_131.1d3fcd7e.2bd057ac_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Hi Michel,<BR>
<BR>
OK, I reread your e-mail and also the LGPL.<BR>
<BR>
It appears to me that since I'm not distributing the executable, I'm under n=
o obligations whatsoever. That is fine.<BR>
<BR>
However, distributing the source can do no harm, so I'll follow your advice,=
GPL all my source, and I'm all warm and fuzzy with that.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks ...<BR>
<BR>
Dave.<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 4/17/2003 8:30:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mbardiaux@pea=
ktime.be writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">DTAshley@aol.com wrote:<BR>
>Hi,<BR>
><BR>
>I joined the GMP list and made one post (a licensing question, e-mail <B=
R>
>attached), but it does not seem to have made it through. Did anyon=
e <BR>
>receive it?<BR>
><BR>
>Is the list working?<BR>
<BR>
Seems to be working, but *very* slowly. It can take several days before <BR>
one recives an answer. Whether the butler did it... err... the majordomo <BR=
>
does not run very often, or there are just not many list members, I <BR>
dont know.<BR>
<BR>
Regarding the license: I would say you have an overly restrictive view <BR>
of the LGPL.<BR>
<BR>
Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.<BR>
<BR>
First, the LGPL (IMHO) places no restriction on *use*. Thus, using GMP <BR>
in your web site does not require you to make sources (yours, or GMP) <BR>
available. Also, for those who download the sources, "However, if you <BR>
use these files with the GMP you will still have to honor whatever <BR>
license terms apply": *use* is not restricted.<BR>
<BR>
LGPL does restrict *distribution*, especially in binary form. If you <BR>
*did* distribute in binary, then (1) the GMP sources, including all <BR>
modifications by you, have to be available (2) the application may *not* <BR=
>
be statically linked, because that would prevent people from using it <BR>
with another release of GMP.<BR>
<BR>
As for *your* sources, it may not be the best solution to declare them <BR>
"I place no restrictions on the files which I'm making available (i.e. <BR>
they are unlicensed)". You do not explicitly place them in the public <BR>
domain, nor do you renounce your copyright, and "unlicensed" is <BR>
ambiguous. Why not GPL them?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Thanks, Dave.<BR>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------=
<BR>
><BR>
>Subject:<BR>
>License Compliance Question<BR>
>From:<BR>
>DTAshley@aol.com<BR>
>Date:<BR>
>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:41:57 EDT<BR>
>To:<BR>
>gmp-discuss@swox.com<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>Hi Guys,<BR>
><BR>
>While in a caffeine-induced psychosis, I authored the following three <B=
R>
>web pages:<BR>
><BR>
>http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/euclid_gcd.php<BR>
><BR>
>http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/miller_rabin.php<BR>
><BR>
>http://esrg.sourceforge.net/phpcgibin/pfact18digit.php<BR>
><BR>
>Along with the GMP logo on each page, I linked to the source code that I=
<BR>
>compiled and statically linked to the GMP, as well as source code for <B=
R>
>the web pages.<BR>
><BR>
>Am I am compliance with the license? Is making sure all source cod=
e is <BR>
>available enough?<BR>
><BR>
>If NO, what must I do to comply?<BR>
><BR>
>Thanks, Dave.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-- <BR>
Michel Bardiaux<BR>
Peaktime Belgium S.A. Bd. du Souverain, 191 B-1160 Bruxelles<BR>
Tel : +32 2 790.29.41<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_131.1d3fcd7e.2bd057ac_boundary--