From: ian Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 15:27:53 +0000 (+0000) Subject: New GPL-vs-LGPL copyright policy explanation file. X-Git-Tag: rel-adns-pre-1-0--1~3^2~4 X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?a=commitdiff_plain;ds=sidebyside;h=71ede3cd9fbed890259fb98218cbf13c170f89ce;p=adns.git New GPL-vs-LGPL copyright policy explanation file. --- diff --git a/GPL-vs-LGPL b/GPL-vs-LGPL new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3c20407 --- /dev/null +++ b/GPL-vs-LGPL @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@ + GPL vs LGPL, in the context of adns + ----------------------------------- + +Several people have asked me to release adns under the GNU Lesser +General Public Licence (LGPL, formerly the Library GPL) instead of the +`stronger' GPL. This file is intended to answer most of these +questions. If you still have questions or comments, please mail me at +. + +Typically there are two or three kinds of situation where people make +this request: the first is where someone is developing a proprietary +program and wishes to make use of adns but doesn't wish to make their +program free software. The second case is where a free software +project is currently using an MIT-like licence and fear `GPL +infection'. The third case, which often overlaps with the second, is +where another free software project currently using a GPL-incompatible +licence, wishes to use adns. + + +1. Proprietary applications of adns +----------------------------------- + +So, let me get this straight. You're writing a proprietary +program, by which I mean that you will not be distributing source code +and not allowing users to modify and share your software; most likely +you are doing this for your own (personal or corporate) financial +gain. + +However, you want to take advantage of adns, software which I have +spent my time and effort on, and which I release as free software so +that everyone can improve, share and use it. + +Don't you think that is a little hypocritical ? I'm sorry, but I +don't want you to just take my nice convenient software, without +giving something back to the free software community or giving the +same rights to your users as I do to you. + +If you really aren't the nasty kind of person I've described here, for +example if you have a good reason other than your own selfishness for +wanting to restrict distribution of your program, then perhaps you +should contact me to discuss it. + + +2. GPL-avoiding projects (MIT licence, et al) +--------------------------------------------- + +Some free software projects prefer to avoid the GPL and other licences +which force the software always to be free. Instead they use +something like the MIT X licence, which allows proprietary versions of +their software. I have to say that I don't understand why they do +this, and think they are misguided, but that doesn't mean that they +don't have a perfect right to. + +Some of these people think that merely writing to an interface +provided by GPL'd software will cause their program to become GPL'd +too, even if they don't distribute the GPL'd software. I don't think +this is the case. I'm perfectly happy for non-GPL'd software to refer +to adns in its source code or executables (eg, dynamic linking). +However, if you distribute adns yourself then whether a program which +uses it needs also to be GPL'd depends on the interpretation of the +`work as a whole' and `mere aggregation' parts of the GPL. + +Whether you are distributing a `work as a whole' might depend on many +things, but they key one to me is what the appearance is to a user. +If the user knows that they are getting a collection of software +rather than a single product, then it's probably an aggregation which +works together. So, you can distribute both your (i) non-GPLd program +source and/or binaries and (ii) adns source code or even binaries +(provided the adns source is available as per the GPL), eg from your +website, provided the user can tell that these are separate works and +can tell which parts are which. + +But, if you package your program and adns together so that the user is +no longer aware of adns as a separate work, then I think you are +distributing a `work as a whole', and the whole work including adns +and your software which depends on it must be GPL'd. This is of +course not a problem if your non-GPL licence is GPL-compatible (see +the next section): it just means that _when the whole lot is shipped +together as one work_ it is covered by the GPL. People who wish to +make proprietary works based on just your code can do so, provided +they (or you) arrange for something to fill the hole left by the lack +of adns. + + +3. GPL-incompatible free software licences +------------------------------------------ + +Regrettably, there are a number of free software licences (and +semi-free licences) in existence which are not compatible with the +GPL. That is, they impose restrictions which are not present in the +GPL, and therefore distributing a whole work which contains such a +program and a GPL'd program is not possible: either the work would +have to be distributed under the GPL (violating the restrictions made +by the original author), or under the GPL-incompatible licence +(violating the GPL). + +I may be prepared to make exceptions for such a licence. Please +contact me at with the full text +of the GPL-incompatible licence. However, I would prefer it if you +could use a GPL-compatible licence for your project instead. + +There are a couple of common extra restrictions, and I make some +specific extensions to my licence for adns below. + +3.1. BSD advertising clause and endorsement restriction + +The most notable and common extra restriction found in free software +licences is the `obnoxious BSD advertising clause' (see Richard +Stallman's article on the subject, available from www.gnu.org) and the +endorsement restriction. + +The problem with the advertising clause isn't that the sentence +required, referring the the Regents of the UC Berkeley, is awkward. +The problem is that if everyone contributing to a large project gets +such a mention the number of sentences required becomes very large; +however, it is unfair for some people to get credit and others not to. + +I disapprove of these clause, but I recognise that it may be difficult +for some people to get them removed from particular programs. + +So, I hereby make an extension to my licence for adns: + + You may alternatively distribute adns under the GNU GPL version 2 + with the following banner and either one or both of the following + additional restrictions, to be inserted at the end of section 1: + + ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS: + (The permissions granted in this licence only apply if you comply + with the following restrictions:) + + (a) All advertising materials mentioning features or use of the Program + (or a work based on the Program, GPL section 2) must display the + following acknowledgement for each author, copyright holder or + group of authors or copyright holders: + + This product includes software developed by PERSON OR GROUP. + + where PERSON OR GROUP is the name of the (group of) authors or + copyright holders, in the form in which they reasonably wish + themselves to be identified in such acknowledgements. A + reasonable alternative form of words must be used if requested + by the person or group. + + The desires of the persons or groups are to be inferred from + statements made about the desired form of such acknowledgements + by these persons or groups in their own copyright notices and + licences. Such statements are to be considered part of the + appropriate copyright notice that the GPL requires you to + publish (section 1). + + This credit must be given for every author and copyright holder + of the Program or the work based on the Program, in so far as it + reasonably possible to determine who the author(s) and copyright + holder(s) are. + + (b) None of the names of the copyright holders and authors of the + Program or works based on the Program may be used to endorse or + promote the Program or works based on the Program without + specific prior written permission. + + Any rephrasing of this restriction provided by authors or + copyright holders in their copyright notices is to be retained + as part of the appropriate copyright notice that the GPL + requires you to publish (section 1). + + +--- Ian Jackson 9.5.1999 + +Local variables: +mode: text +End: diff --git a/changelog b/changelog index 6dbb10a..1b7d991 100644 --- a/changelog +++ b/changelog @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ adns (0.2) experimental; urgency=low * Look for inet_aton and inet_ntoa (in -lnsl and -lsocket). * Added COPYING (copy of the GPL). + * New GPL-vs-LGPL copyright policy explanation file. --