Re: question about gpl-commercial dual licencing
On 4/21/07, Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all.
Say someone creates a library libfoo in the C language. The library is
dual-licenced -- under the GPL and under a commercial licence. GPL is
for open-source consumers and commercial licence is for closed-source
consumers.
Now I create Python binding to that library - pyfoo. Now I would like to
dual-licence it myself, under the same terms -- GPL and a commercial
licence.
Now to get the right of dual-licensing, do I have to obtain a commercial
licence from the author of libfoo?
If yes, why? If no, why not? Please elucidate. Thanks.
If you created the bindings using ctypes or similar, where there's no
actual linking taking place, I think it's all OK.
Otherwise, I think you still need a license - you would be linking
against the library to create the bindings, therefore creating a
derivative work, and as you have received the library under the GPL
the terms of the GPL must apply. Of course, it still depends on
whether the commercial license gives permission to do stuff like that
anyway.
However, I think a nice email to the author can clear it all up anyway
- your Python bindings would simply drive more sales of the commercial
license anyway.
--
Andrew Donnellan
ajdlinuxATgmailDOTcom (primary) ajdlinuxATexemailDOTcomDOTau (secure)
http://andrewdonnellan.com http://ajdlinux.wordpress.com
ajdlinux@jabber.org.au hkp://subkeys.pgp.net 0x5D4C0C58
http://linux.org.au http://debian.org
Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484
Spammers only === ajdspambucket@exemail.com.au ===
Reply to: