Comments on: The Chilling Effect of the GPL http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html Data is ones and zeroes | Software is ones and zeroes and hard work. Thu, 24 May 2012 15:30:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: The Third Bit » Blog Archive » I’m Not a Lawyer… http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3539 The Third Bit » Blog Archive » I’m Not a Lawyer… Thu, 27 May 2010 12:45:03 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3539 [...] being deliberately paranoid here, but past experience with licensing and other legal matters has taught me to assume that contracts mean exactly, and only, what’s [...] [...] being deliberately paranoid here, but past experience with licensing and other legal matters has taught me to assume that contracts mean exactly, and only, what’s [...]

]]> By: Peter Nixon http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3538 Peter Nixon Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:59:27 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3538 Interestingly, I can't find any source code for Fog Creek's "open-source code storage component". Do you have any idea where it is at? Interestingly, I can’t find any source code for Fog Creek’s “open-source code storage component”. Do you have any idea where it is at?

]]> By: Boris Bokowski http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3537 Boris Bokowski Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:41:27 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3537 Have you considered Git? There's an effort underway at the Eclipse Foundation to build an implementation of the Git version control system under the BSD license. See http://www.eclipse.org/jgit ("JGit is an EDL (new-style BSD) licensed, lightweight, pure Java library implementing the Git version control system") The only wrinkle (there's always one isn't there) is that JGit is written in Java, but if Basie runs on Jython it might be doable. Have you considered Git? There’s an effort underway at the Eclipse Foundation to build an implementation of the Git version control system under the BSD license. See http://www.eclipse.org/jgit (“JGit is an EDL (new-style BSD) licensed, lightweight, pure Java library implementing the Git version control system”)

The only wrinkle (there’s always one isn’t there) is that JGit is written in Java, but if Basie runs on Jython it might be doable.

]]> By: Manfred Moser http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3536 Manfred Moser Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:22:59 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3536 interesting thing is that Fogcreek does seem to distribute Kiln... maybe the install process says install Mercurial yourself like so. And then they are fine too as far as I know.. interesting thing is that Fogcreek does seem to distribute Kiln… maybe the install process says install Mercurial yourself like so. And then they are fine too as far as I know..

]]> By: Manfred Moser http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3535 Manfred Moser Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:20:27 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3535 As long as you don't distribute the software you can embed GPL V2 software as much as you like. Thats one of the loopholes that got closed with V3. Apparently Mercurial is used in Kiln (http://www.fogcreek.com/Kiln/) and they seem to be fine with the license.. As long as you don’t distribute the software you can embed GPL V2 software as much as you like. Thats one of the loopholes that got closed with V3. Apparently Mercurial is used in Kiln (http://www.fogcreek.com/Kiln/) and they seem to be fine with the license..

]]> By: Van Lindberg http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3534 Van Lindberg Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:15:59 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3534 To clarify, it just sounded like you found disagreement between Fog Creek's lawyers and what I said, where there is not. Probably the distinction is that Fog Creek's lawyers found that in the specific case of Kiln's Mercurial support, the plugin was a derived work. This is probably true, and I have no reason to doubt it. My point was that: 1) plugins are not *always* derivative works, and 2)host programs are unlikely to be derived works of individual plugins. (Otherwise they would be the "program," not the "plugin." The program needs to come first.) These two points mean that the derivative work relationship is not necessarily transitive across a bridging plugin if it is done right. Fog Creek's solution is a good example: The vcs-agnostic storage component is a derivative work of host program #1 (Mercurial), so it is GPL-licensed. However, host program #2 (Kiln) is not a derivative work of the storage component, so Kiln's licensing stays proprietary. To clarify, it just sounded like you found disagreement between Fog Creek’s lawyers and what I said, where there is not. Probably the
distinction is that Fog Creek’s lawyers found that in the specific case of Kiln’s Mercurial support, the plugin was a derived work. This is
probably true, and I have no reason to doubt it.

My point was that:
1) plugins are not *always* derivative works, and
2)host programs are unlikely to be derived works of individual plugins. (Otherwise they would be the “program,” not the “plugin.” The program needs to come first.)

These two points mean that the derivative work relationship is not necessarily transitive across a bridging plugin if it is done right. Fog Creek’s solution is a good example:

The vcs-agnostic storage component is a derivative work of host program
#1 (Mercurial), so it is GPL-licensed. However, host program #2 (Kiln)
is not a derivative work of the storage component, so Kiln’s licensing
stays proprietary.

]]> By: More on GPL and derivatives http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3533 More on GPL and derivatives Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:18:15 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3533 [...] Remember those Nerd Lawyers arguing over the GPL and plugins? Now there are some Nerd Professors arguing over the same thing. [...] [...] Remember those Nerd Lawyers arguing over the GPL and plugins? Now there are some Nerd Professors arguing over the same thing. [...]

]]> By: Alexei http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3532 Alexei Tue, 13 Apr 2010 03:07:07 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3532 You can distribute Basie under two licenses. A GPL version that contains the Mercurial integration and an MIT version that does not include Mercurial support. This should be okay provided all contributors to the non-Mercurial part agree to dual license their code. You can distribute Basie under two licenses.

A GPL version that contains the Mercurial integration and an MIT version that does not include Mercurial support.

This should be okay provided all contributors to the non-Mercurial part agree to dual license their code.

]]> By: Dan Farmer http://third-bit.com/blog/archives/3767.html#comment-3531 Dan Farmer Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:55:59 +0000 http://pyre.third-bit.com/blog/?p=3767#comment-3531 Interesting post Greg. Thanks for sharing it. Although I've used software written under GPL, MIT, BSD, Mozilla, Apache, etc licenses for many years -- I have to confess that I only read those licenses in the last year. It's funny that the restrictiveness of the spectrum of licenses seems to resemble a Laffer curve with propietary at one end and GPL at the other (and IP freedom on the y axis). Interesting post Greg. Thanks for sharing it. Although I’ve used software written under GPL, MIT, BSD, Mozilla, Apache, etc licenses for many years — I have to confess that I only read those licenses in the last year. It’s funny that the restrictiveness of the spectrum of licenses seems to resemble a Laffer curve with propietary at one end and GPL at the other (and IP freedom on the y axis).

]]>