Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I’m somewhat confused about the implications of introducing source code licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License. I'm developing a test framework and I want to use and modify an open source project as part of the existing framework. Does this imply that the entire test framework should be open sourced?
You can integrate the LGPL component into a proprietary solution as long as it stays separate. So for example linking is fine, usage as a processor is fine. Bundling is also fine, as long as you clearly state that the bundle contains LGPL software and which that is.
You certainly can modify that software to your needs, that is the whole point of Open Source Software. However of you spread it again afterwards, for example by bundling it with your framework, you have to publish your modifications.
In general follow this rule of thumb:
You can use it and modify it to your needs, but do not try to make it appear as if you implemented that solution. Be fair and give credits to those who did the work for you.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I was evaluating ZK framework, which is LGPL and it's spring plugin zk-spring is GPL.
If i develop a system with different application like domain, web(zk, zk-spring), web-services. Now When I deploy these application on the client machine, would i have to also provide all the source code of my applications to the client? I also want to keep proprietary of code to myself.
Or Should i buy license and can own my application code and don't have to use the GPL.
I am not clear so, please answer my all concerns and issue involved here.
looking forward to hear from you soon and thanks in advance.
If you wish to distribute any work that is derivative of, or contains sufficient protectable expressive content taken from, a work covered by the GPL, you must also distribute the source code of that work, even if you wrote it. There really is no better answer possible. If you need an opinion that you can legally rely on, consult an attorney.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Suggest me any open source based platform/IDE/framework/toolkit for developing intelligent agent. I don't have any background in this area, would like to use a tool or any tutorial in building intelligent agent.
If you don't have any background at all, I suggest you start with something simple.
I had quite a good experience with dmangame, a simple Python engine where you can script the behaviour of agents.
The good point is that the installation is very simple, you know where to code your Python scripts for AI, there is a nice API for it. And you've got a nice graphical interface to see directly what you code.
Edit : By the way, look at this similar question
Weka is probably the most comprehensive open source AI toolkit. It's positioned as a tool for "data mining" but don't let that put you of - it's a general toolset for machine learning which is exactly what you need if you want to build an intelligent agent.
You can use any IDE you like with it (it's Java based so that gives you a range of great open source IDEs such as Eclipse or Netbeans, but you can also call the Weka libraries from other languages if you like).
It also has some of its own tools build it (for visualisation and exploring data sets etc.)
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm working on a web based ladder system for a game. It is very game specific and I want to make the project open source so the community can give back, contribute and make the experience better for everyone. However at the same time I don't want people to re-use the code/implement the code on separate sites because the purpose of the website/project is to unify the community under one roof. So my question is: what is the best license to use to make that possible?
... I don't want people to re-use the code/implement the code on separate sites ...
This really misses the point of Free Software, or as the FSF puts it, it's open source but not really Free Software. Despite my tone, I'm not here to lecture you, I'm simply pointing out that people are not likely to help if the project has this kind of restriction.
However, if you change that to:
... I don't want people to re-use the code/implement the code on separate sites without contributing any modifications they make back to the project ...
Then the GNU Affero General Public License might be appropriate; it prevents people from modifying your website unless they publish their changes under the same license.
If you still insist on your original restriction, then no open source license will help you, since most of them are about being Free Software, not just open source. You're going to have to write your own license, or modify an existing one.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I would like to publish my application, which is AGPL. It can be downloaded from my website. But the archive also contains other libraries with different licenses:
XStream (BSD)
GWT (Apache2)
gwt-dnd (Apache2)
gwt-upload (Apache2)
Commons Fileupload (Apache2)
JDOM (Apache-style)
iText (AGPL)
JFreeChart (LGPL)
JavaMail (JavaMail)
I didn't change any of these libraries, I just use them. What do I have to do?
Do I have to mention the used libraries on my website or in the COPYING file in my application archive?
Do I have to mention the authors?
Do I have to mention all the licenses?
Do I have to provide all the licenses somehow to my users?
Since answering to my question could be legal advice and therefore problematic, is there a project online which looks similar to mine? Perhaps there is an "anonymous" answer to my question?
People answering legal or licensing questions are not trying to be evasive. But it's hard to answer licensing questions in a way that can be as accurate as the terms spelled out in the license itself. Trying to interpret legal text can expose one to liability if one gets it even slightly wrong (even non-lawyers can be held liable).
Many questions about GPL are answered in plain English here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
The Apache License 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) covers terms of redistribution. See for example section 4, paragraph 4.
The New BSD License covers terms of redistribution (for both source and binaries) in the second paragaph. That license in particular is quite short, and easy to read.
Do not make business decisions without consulting with a legal professional.
You will have to provide it for all those libraries that require it as per their respective licensing requirements.
You have to read the licenses, and act accordingly.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
What are the implications of including a set of visual components released under a Mozilla Public License in a commercial application.
Do I have any obligations?
I've found pretty good analysis on MPL (and others) by Frank Hecker here:
http://hecker.org/writings/setting-up-shop (search for "Mozilla Public License")
This pretty much sums it up:
For MozPL-ed source code considered as
a set of source files, modifications
of the original source files are
considered to also fall under the
MozPL, as are new source files
incorporating extracts from the
original source files. Such modified
or new files are required to be
licensed under the same terms as the
original files, and in particular must
be made freely and publicly available
in source form.
...
Thus an open-source product initially
released under the MozPL may be
extended with proprietary code to
create new proprietary products, as
long as the proprietary code is
separate (i.e., in separate files) and
interacts with the open-source code
using a defined API.
But as usual, read it carefully and consult your lawyers.
The only problem is if you modify the components you must release them under Mozilla Public License as well