could i have to send all the source code of the application who has just one gpl library? [closed] - open-source

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.

Related

Can open source product have paid components? [closed]

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 in the thought process of making my application open source. Before considering the licensing options, I would like to consider the below scenario and get your opinions.
My app is using some paid components for a module to work. That is, I'm paying for a developer license and a server license for the development and deployment of that module. Is this a showstopper in making my app as an open source application?
Yes the application you make would still be Open Source, because this is your own code so you can choose what you wanna do with it.
The way I look at it is, when you design an Open Source application that is running on Windows, it is Open Source even though it uses some code from Microsoft that is not Open Source.
And you can also have an application that is Open Source, but that you charge money for.
If someone is experts on this field then please correct me if I am wrong :)
I use this app to understand open source license terms (they have proprietary license too): https://enterprise.dejacode.com/license_library/
Hope it helps.

Implications when using GNU licensed open source [closed]

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.

Picking an appropriate license [closed]

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.

What needs to be done, when publishing Open Source Software which uses other free libraries? [closed]

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.

Porting LGPL code - what license can I use? [closed]

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 have ported some LGPL code from Java to C#, which I plan to release as an open source component. Do I have to release my new library under LGPL too, or can I go with something less restrictive like MS-PL?
Since you're basing your work on the original LGPL work, it seems to me that your work is a derivative of the original, and so section 2 of the license applies: Your code needs to be LGPL or, at your option, GPL. (The wording is different in versions 2 and 3, but it's the same section.) But I'm just a programmer, so what do I know? You're asking a question about the law, so your best course of action is to ask a lawyer.
I believe you have to use LGPL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License#Differences_from_the_GPL
It depends on whether your port is a derivative work (generally port == derivative work).