[ug-bosug] FOSS License compatibilities

[Moinak Ghosh]

Shivakumar G.N wrote:
> There already exist lot of code base under different FOSS licenses. 
> One of the largest being GPL. If any of you have pointers as to the 
> issues related to using two pieces of softwares under different 
> licenses let me know.
>
> I am basically looking for some kind of compatibility matrix.
> License X and License Y in general and
> CDDL and License Y in particular (I have GPL in mind for license Y 
> since it has huge code base).
> When can a
> - Code under CDDL be reused with Code under License Y
> - CDDL software statically link with License Y
> - CDDL software dynamically link with License Y
> - CDDL softwares be packaged along with softwares under license Y in 
> the same media.
   I went through the same confusion initially and there was a huge
   debate in the Debian community regarding the OpenSolaris distros
   and things were finally put to rest by Eben Moglen (FSF general
   counsel), Ian Murdock (Debian founder) and others.

   CDDL is a file-based license that allows incorporating CDDL-ed
   files (statically linked in) in other projects that contain non-CDDL
   license, even if the other license is a commercial one. This holds
   as long as CDDL code is not copied into other non-CDDL files.

   GPL is a project based license that covers all files in a project. Any
   files added to a GPL project must be covered under GPL as well.
   So the GPL won't allow mixing of CDDL and GPL files in one
   project even though CDDL allows it.

   CDDL license thus is more liberal than GPL but less liberal than
   BSD license.

   In addition the following scenarios are my understanding:

   GPL apps can be bundled/packaged in the same media along with
   CDDL-ed OpenSolaris - this was the crux of the Debian debate and
   was finally cleared by Eben Moglen.

   GPL apps can dynamically link to CDDL-ed libraries and be
   redistributed in that form.

   A CDDL app can dynamically link to an LGPL library (eg. glibc)
   but Not a GPL library. Since the app requires functionality provided
   by the GPL library it can be considered as a derivative product -
   unless the GPL library explicitly grants an exception clause or is dual-
   licensed.

   A GPL kernel module may Not be redistributed along with CDDL
   OpenSolaris kernel in a distribution as it violates the GPL, though
   an end-user can choose to separately download and use it for
   personal purposes.

   In general Richard Stallman himself considers CDDL essentially to be
   a Free Software license though it is not compatible with GPLv2.

   GPLv3 now in Draft stage does look very similar to CDDL and may
   become compatible.

Regards,
Moinak.
>
> I came across multiple discussions on the net but could not come 
> across a place where the information is captured in a snap shot.
> If there such a information is not available, I'll put a page for the 
> same (atleast on for CDDL with other FOSS licenses may be put).
>
> -Shiv
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ug-bosug mailing list
> List-Unsubscribe: mailto:ug-bosug-unsubscribe at opensolaris.org
> List-Owner: mailto:ug-bosug-owner at opensolaris.org
> List-Archives: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=54
>   

_______________________________________________
ug-bosug mailing list
List-Unsubscribe: mailto:ug-bosug-unsubscribe at opensolaris.org
List-Owner: mailto:ug-bosug-owner at opensolaris.org
List-Archives: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=54