[pLog-svn] templates/plugins have to be GPL without an "exemption"? (fwd)

Jon Daley plogworld at jon.limedaley.com
Tue Sep 25 08:27:25 EDT 2007


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:26:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jon Daley <plogworld at jon.limedaley.com>
To: licensing at fsf.org
Subject: Re: [pLog-svn] templates/plugins have to be GPL without an "exemption"?
      (fwd)

 	Hi.  I was recently made aware of the Joomla licensing interpretation, 
and am wondering how it affects us, LifeType.  We don't want to interpret the 
GPL as they have, and as I read more of your FAQ (GPL2), it seems that what we 
want to do is not covered by GPL2 (ie. I think Joomla's interpretation is 
correct, that plugins are definitely too tied into the main code-base to be 
considered a separate work; templates are more of a borderline case).
 	Now that I write that, it is the case that our plugins are more 
separate than Wordpress's or Joomla's - the plugin code stays separate from the 
main core, can be removed by "rm -r plugins/<pluginname>", and there are clear 
API lines between what a plugin can and cannot do. (Previously, I thought that 
was all that was needed to separate GPL and non-GPL code - clear API lines)

 	So, the question is, can we use GPL2, but include a clause like the one 
quoted below, or do we need a different license altogether to allow people to 
write plugins and templates that are not GPLed?

 	If we can use a clause (we would prefer to stay GPLed), do you know of 
a clause that is already written, rather than trying to write our own, and 
likely missing something?

Thanks,
Jon Daley
Software Developer for LifeType.net


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:22:33 +0300
From: Oscar Renalias
To: LifeType Developer List
Subject: Re: [pLog-svn] templates/plugins have to be GPL without an 
"exemption"?

I think that this summarizes it pretty well:

> "We don't consider plugins or templates (e.g. that code that lives in the 
> plugins or templates directory of a LifeType installation) that is created by 
> a 3rd party to be a derivative work of the LifeType software. We highly 
> encourage you to release your plugins and templates under the GPL, but you 
> are free to use other licenses as well".

But if you're right and this goes against the GPL, then we need to
make this exception clause visible somewhere.

Oscar
_______________________________________________
pLog-svn mailing list
http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn


More information about the pLog-svn mailing list