[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua licensing thoughts
- From: Jan Schütze <JanS@...>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 08:26:07 +0200
Benjamin Tolputt schrieb:
I think he meant, the part about redistributing. As far as I know (I am
not a lawyer) the GPL allows you to redistribute the application only,
if you include all your parts under the terms of GPL. While LGPL
allows/requires you to release only the LGPL part under LGPL and
redistribute anything else under any other license (Speaking about 1
download package, containing all).
David Given wrote:
While the GPL doesn't restrict what data a program *uses*, it *does*
restrict your ability to redistribute that data. Lua bytecode is code
--- it's a compiled program. Therefore, if the source that made it is
GPLd, and you're not the original author, then you must provide a means
to get the source if you want to redistribute it.
Actually, that is incorrect. That would imply that all programs compiled
with gcc are GPL'ed. One can GPL a virtual machine & compiler but
distribute the code they produce under any license provided the compiled
byte/native code does not contain significant portions of GPL'd product.
Simply put - even if Lua was GPL-licensed (which it is not, it is simply
GPL-compatible), the byte code it produces can be released under any
license the author chooses. The simple fact that there are
hundreds-to-thousands of non-GPL applications compiled by gcc and
distributed as binaries are proof of that.