From: Matthew B. <lib...@su...> - 2007-04-05 22:33:52
|
Thank you for this information. It helps me a lot with my concerns. I =20= had some people question me about this answer, and I wasn't quite =20 sure how to respond. This will help me out greatly. Thanks again. On Apr 05, 2007, at 12:31 , Stanislav Brabec wrote: > Bruce Allen wrote: >> Hey Matthew, >> >> Thanks for sending this. Some brief comments: >> >> (1) I think it's OK to charge as you are doing. I'm copying the >> Developers list since there are other people there who know more =20 >> than me >> about GPL. > > It's OK in any case to charge even for stand-alone GPL binary. > >> (2) I suggest that on your main page you mention that the source =20 >> is GPL. >> I think you may need to provide the source code from your web =20 >> page, not >> just included with the program, but I am not sure about this. > > No, you don't need to put it on web, source + binary on medium is OK. > Even only written offer to send source code (valid for 3 years) is OK. > >> On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, Matthew Butch wrote: > >>> If I am reading the GPL correctly, I am allowed to charge for it, as >>> long as I include the source code with it. I am including the source >>> code in the disk image, and I make it clear that my app is based on >>> smartmontools. I have not modified smartmontools, I am just using it >>> in my GUI. I wanted to check to see what the list thought. > > As long as you application does not link with smartmontools, it's OK. > If you only parse output of smarctl and don't link with its code, any > license for GUI is allowed. > > --=20 > Best Regards / S pozdravem, > > Stanislav Brabec > software developer > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sb...@su... > Lihovarsk=E1 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966 > 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 > Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ > -- Matthew Butch Sent with Mac OS X Mail 2.1 (752/752.2) |