www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Markus Stier <markus.st...@stegmannsystems.com>
Subject AW: AW: Clarify relation between GPL and Apache license
Date Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:47:12 GMT
Paul,

see below...

> 
> Markus,
> 
> I would suggest you open a jira issue about this with a suggestion for a FAQ
> change.
> I read a completely different answer to the question in the FAQ (a citation of
> the FSF's point of view), this sounds weird..
> 
> I would suggest:
> 
> Q: Is the Apache license compatible with the GPL (GNU Public License)?
> A: Although the Free Software Foundation website indicates a rather strong
> incompatibility, the answer to this question boils down to one of the two
> following questions:

Why "strong incompatibility"? There is an incompatibility with GPL version 2, which is resolved
in GPL 3. 
Since most GPL libraries are licensed with "GPL version 2 or later" this should not be an
issue.

I would suggest:
 Q: Is the Apache license compatible with the GPL (GNU Public License)?
 A: It depends on the GPL version and the usage scenario. 
 The answer to this question boils down to one of the two
 following questions:

> 
> Q: Can I license my software under the Apache Public License if it links to
> software under the GNU Public License
> A:  No. The GNU Public License requires any software linked to a software
> under the GNU Public License to be under the same license.

OK

> Q: Can I license my software under the GNU Public License if it links to a
> component under the Apache Public License?
> A: Yes. Nothing of both licenses prevent this.
>   Note that it still means that the attributions of the softwares under the two
> different licenses will be required.

I'd suggest:

Q: Can I license my software under the GNU Public License if it links to a
component under the Apache Public License?
A: Yes, if you use GPL version 3. Nothing of both licenses prevent this.
  Note that it still means that the attributions of the softwares under the two
 different licenses will be required. 

> 
> Maybe I'm too strong but at least I'd claim to be pragmatic.
> 
> paul
> 
> 
> Le 14 déc. 2011 à 12:11, Markus Stier a écrit :
> 
> > Paul,
> >
> > I think it comes down to these two questions:
> > 1. "Can I license my software under GPL if linking to an ASF library?"
> > as you mentioned and:
> > 2. "Can I license my software under Apache License if linking to an GPL
> library?"
> >
> > Regarding  the first question, the FSF states that Apache License 2.0 and
> GPL 3.0 are compatible and therefore the answer is "Yes".
> > Regarding  the second question the answer is "No". The explanation is
> given in http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html.
> >
> > I'm not related to ASF nor FSF. I'm just examining licenses for a project of
> mine and discovered the ambiguity in the ASF FAQ. Again, I suggest that you
> remove the "Is the Apache license compatible with the GPL (GNU Public
> License)?" question and replace it with those from above.
> >
> > Markus
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Markus,
> >>
> >> could you please describe your compatibility definition?
> >>
> >> That whole discussion, and ping pong among FSF and ASF about it,
> >> leads me to think that compatibility should just not be mentioned.
> >> The true questions would be, for example "Can I license my software
> >> under GPL if linking to an ASF library?"
> >>
> >> Or?
> >>
> >> paul
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 14 déc. 2011 à 11:28, Markus Stier a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
> >>> There are currently (at least) two places which address the
> >>> compatibility
> >> between GPL 2.x and the Apache license 2.0.
> >>> At  http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL, ASF
> >>> states
> >> that both licenses are compatible. This is misleading or even incorrect.
> >>> According to http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html,
> >>> the Apache 2.0 license is only compatible to GPL >= 2.x if the GPLed
> >> software uses Apache'd libraries but not vice versa. This seems to be
> >> the more appropriate statement.
> >>>
> >>> I suggest that the FAQ page should be updated.
> >>>
> >>> Best
> >>>
> >>> Markus
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> >
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message