[jsword-devel] Alkitab Bible Study 0.9 released

[Ben Morgan]

Hi,

I think there is a basic misunderstanding about how the GPL works with Sword
and Jsword. This is how I see the problem...

Sword or JSword (which contains 3 or 4 files under the GPL) are both under
the GPL v2.
Any frontend to these is a derivative work, and thus that program *as a
whole* must be able to be licensed under the GPL. However, the actual
frontend code can be licensed under a less strict license by the copyright
holder for that code. Provided that the license is compatible with the GPL,
it will all work legally - the combination being under the GPL. That section
of code which they have released under a more permissive license (e.g. LGPL
or BSD) can then be used elsewhere in different programs.

 This is clearly stated here:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#GPLModuleLicense

Public domain, however, is not a license - it is releasing all claims to
copyright on the code. This means anyone can do whatever they like with it.

So let's say with Alkitab - if it was released under the LGPL, I could take
out parts of it which don't use JSword (or modify them so they don't) and
use them with other LGPL software. This would be quite okay. As it is, it is
public domain, so I could (though of course I won't :) take out the bits
which rely on JSword, and release it as a commercial program.

God Bless,
Ben
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness,
but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish,
but that all should reach repentance.
2 Peter 3:9 (ESV)

On 6/5/08, Jonathan Morgan <jonmmorgan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Peter von Kaehne <refdoc at gmx.net> wrote:
> > Jonathan Morgan wrote:
> >>> 6) Licensing - not my area of knowledge - but do you think it is
> correct
> >>> to link a public domain programme to a GPL library? Or is Java with its
> >>> multiple separate jars designed in a fashion that this is not a matter
> >>> of concern?
> >>
> >> Two points on this:
> >> 1. Public domain software is fairly obviously GPL compatible (see
> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
> >> for a list of GPL compatible licenses).
> >
> > Incorporating PD into GPL yes, but GPL into PD appears to me
> > counterintuitive as the GPL requirements will trump. Certainly BSD into
> > GPL is a one-way street (remember that fight last year about wireless
> > code from OpenBSD in Linux?)
>
> It is a one way street if anyone chooses to modify the GPL'ed version,
> but they could just as easily be modifying the public domain version.
> If they release their changes under public domain then it remains
> public domain (though one questions whether it will actually be useful
> without the GPL'ed library).
>
> Jon
>
> _______________________________________________
> jsword-devel mailing list
> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/jsword-devel/attachments/20080605/0bf7287e/attachment.html