[openobex-users] Re: License Clarification sought

[Jean T. <jt...@bo...>]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 10:29:22AM -0800, Max Krasnyansky wrote:
> At 0:9 M /14/003 0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 06:48:26PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> >> But if you link it with Bluetooth
> >> support you will make it GPL.
> >
> >        BlueZ doesn't make OpenObex GPL, because we don't use any
> >BlueZ code.
> >        But, even if OpenObex is LGPL, it's not practically possible
> >to use OpenObex over BlueZ without the resulting program becoming
> >GPL, because the final program will *link* with bluez-lib and
> >bluez-rfcomm which are GPL.
> >        Actually, if you re-implement bluez-libs and bluez-rfcomm as
> >LGPL, you could use OpenObex over BlueZ in a LGPL fashion. But my
> >guess is that nobody will bother.
>
> Yeah, we should probably change license for bluez-libs to LGPL.
> I'll talk to our legal folks.

	Well, I didn't intend to stir up a debate about BlueZ
licenses. The two things a quite independant, and I have absolutely no
problem with BlueZ libs beeing GPL, and this was not a request to
change BlueZ license.

> btw Jean, bluez-rfcomm does not exists. There is some code in CVS
> but if was not officially released. And nothing depends on it.
> Are you still in gaga land ;) ? 

	Yeah, my bluez-utils were too old. I upgraded it and it now
works. That's the trouble of having a big mouth.

> >        So, I would personally vote to continue OpenObex as LGPL (but
> >adding a note with respect to BlueTooth use).
>
> I'm pretty sure that license switch can be made. So don't add any
> notes for now.

	Or we make the note in a generic form, because this may apply
for custom transport : "OpenObex is LGPL, but if you use the OpenObex
library in conjunction with any GLP library, even if your code doesn't
directly access the said GPL library, it is our belief that the
resulting work is covered by the GPL".

> Max 

	Have fun...

	Jean