www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Inquiries - RiskX Malaysia
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2016 10:31:16 GMT
You should be asking your attorney these questions. Advice you get from
other people is not legal advice.

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Nelly Nelissa <nelly@risk-x.com.my> wrote:

> *To: GNU, Apache*
>
> If we redistribute software modified from a base software licensed under
> <insert license>, do we have to disclose and/or release the software’s
> source code entirely (including other components) as well?
>

For Apache, no.

For software licensed under most of the Gnu licenses, specifically the Gnu
Public License <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License>
(GPL) and the Lesser Gnu Public License
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License> (LGPL)
you have to make available the modified work. For more information, contact
the Free Software Foundation.

For software licensed under the Apache Software License
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_License>, you have a duty to disclose
the fact that you based your software on the original, but you don't have
to disclose the source code.


> *To: GNU, Apache*
>
> If we redistribute software with base component(s) licensed under <insert
> license>, do we have to disclose and/or release the software’s source code
> entirely (including other components) as well?
>

For Apache licenses, the situation is similar to the first answer, but the
requirement to notify about the source is probably handled by the Apache
licensed software itself.

For GPL software, the answer varies.



>  *To: Bonitasoft*
>
> If a custom workflow is created using Bonitasoft Community which is
> licensed under GPL 2.0, do we need to disclose and/or release the workflow
> configuration to the public?
>

If the software is licensed under GPL, then that license controls the
situation.

Mime
View raw message