Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian

[Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>]

Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 09:27:30AM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:

>> When we see a plugin written under the GPL for a GPL-incompatible
>> work, we have two choices:
>
>> - Assume the author of the plugin was confused, and that the plugin
>>   isn't even distributable, or
>> - Assume that the author intends that the plugin have an implicit
>>   exception for the gpl-incompatible work.
>
> - Assume that the author knows what he's doing after all, and only
>   intends for the plugin to be distributable in source format until a
>   GPL-compatible framework comes along.

Hrm.  I hadn't thought of that one.  Do you know of a case where
someone's actually done this?

>> We generally go with the latter, simply because it makes more sense.
>
> We'd better not, without a clarifying statement from the copyright
> holder; see above.

I'm pretty sure we've done this in the past, but I don't have time to
look for it at the moment.  But if your third option above is a
possibility, then you're right.  Though I'd lean toward assuming that
suggestion #2 is correct, barring evidence to the contrary.  Presumably
if someone wrote code as a sort of hostage for GPL compatibility they'd
write something explaining this.

Certainly, whatever we assume, it's important to try to get
clarification.

>> But that does have implications, namely that the plugin isn't
>> actually under the GPL, but under a sort of GPL+exception hybrid
>> license.  Which, in turn, means that it's not really GPL compatible
>> -- GPL code from other sources and other authors can not be used with
>> this "GPL" plugin.
>
> GPL+exceptions is still GPL-compatible, regardless of whether the
> thing being given an exception is GPL-compatible.

Perhaps in some ways.  I guess I was trying to avoid splitting any more
hairs than necessary.  It presumably can be incorporated into a standard
GPL work by dropping the exception (though unless that's explicit I'd
hesitate to do so -- and if the exception itself is implicit the right
to drop it certainly isn't explicit).  But you certainly can't go and
incorporate GPL code from someone else into your work and link it with
the exception-inducing code.  That would amount to adding the exception
to their code.  The important thing to remember is that:

GPL != GPL+exception

-- 
Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333  9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03