Re: GPL and scripting languages (here: python2.3-psycopg)
"W. Borgert" <debacle@debian.org> writes:
> Ciao,
>
> my understanding of the GPL is, that one can use GPLed
> scripting language modules, such as python2.3-psycopg, in a
> non-GPL, proprietory application, right? (As long as I give
> away the module itself and any changes I might have done
> under the GPL, of course.) Or do I have to use
> python2.3-pgsql (BSD licensed) for that totally non-free
> stuff?
If you are releasing a combined work which contains GPL'd code, the
entire work is derivative of each component, and must comply with the
license of that component. So yes, if you're shipping a bundle of
your software and psycopg, you have to offer the source for your
software as well. The fact that it uses python's import instead of
C's #include has nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, if you rely on psycopg being a normal part of the
OS, and do not ship it yourself, then you do not have to ship the
source for your program:
: However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not
: include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or
: binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on)
: of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that
: component itself accompanies the executable.
But I advise you to consult a lawyer. If you're to be distributing
proprietary software, consider it a cost of doing business.
-Brian
> Saluti,
> --
> W. Borgert <debacle@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~debacle/
--
Brian Sniffen bts@alum.mit.edu
Reply to: