Re: [Hebmorph-thinktank] HebMorph patch

[Efraim F. <efr...@gm...>]

Hi,

I would like to clarify something about your (possibly unconventional?) 
interpretation of the GPL. The GPL itself doesn't limit the private use 
of GPL'd software. It does limit distribution of binaries that are 
compiled from GPL sources. So, I think you're right about the particular 
case you were asked about: you can't legally distribute binaries 
compiled from GPL source code without distributing the source code (or 
buying an exception to the GPL). You can, however, distribute binaries 
in a commercial product and distribute the source code or an offer for 
the source code and have no further obligations to upstream.

Stated more broadly, the GPL is not a usage license, it's a copyright 
license for the source code.

By the way, I agree with you that commercial users who use hebmorph 
should contribute financially to the project. I don't see a requirement 
to do so anywhere unless they want to do something which is otherwise 
not allowed under the GPL. Preventing commercial *use* as-such, though, 
would make the software non-free.

-Efraim

On 06/09/2011 08:14 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> The thought behind licensing HebMorph with a restrictive license
> (currently GPL) is to be able to negotiate a usage fee from commercial
> users. This is to make sure the project can stay alive and make real
> progress. And let me elaborate.
>
>
>
> Therefore, as far as I'm concerned, no commercial usage is allowed
> without either purchasing a commercial license or releasing the code
> that uses HebMorph as GPL. Perhaps GPL is not all too strict about this,
> and can be interpreted differently in terms of "derivative work", and I
> might make a license change to reflect that. The general idea, again, is
> to be able to support further development of the project and make sure
> it meets its far-reaching goals.
>


-- 
---
Efraim Feinstein
Lead Developer
Open Siddur Project
http://opensiddur.net
http://wiki.jewishliturgy.org