Re: [ng-spice] new guy: licensing issues
> In the GPL we read:
> These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable
> sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can
> be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves,
> then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections
> when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the
> same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the
> Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this
> License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire
> whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
>
> How to make the "integration plug in" a separate piece ?
Our software is designed to use any number of different simulators at its
core.
For our part, we simply write a new interface class for each simulator that
we
use. Of course, this is very important to us because many of our customers
may
have in-house simulators which they may wish to use with our tool. Our
company
can then write a custom interface class for their simulation tool when they
provide us with an interface definition. The other approach is for us to
publish the API which our tool requires of a simulator and then leave it up to
other parties to provide the necessary functionality. If we were bigger and
owned the marketplace, this might be the right approach. At this point,
however, we are the ones writing simulator wrappers to integrate new
simulation tools into our product.
There are a number of different ways a GPL simulator could be integrated into
our tool:
1) spawned as a separate process
2) called via a dynamically liked .so
3) called via a statically linked library
Most would agree that 1) does not violate the spirit of GPL. Most would agree
that 3) does violate the spirit of GPL. I believe that 2) is much more
contentious.
For example, suppose we distribute software that is statically linked with BSD
spice, but has the option of dynamically loading other simulator cores. If
we
publish the required simulator interface and somebody adds the appropriate
interface to a GPL simulator and uses it with our product, are we guilty of
violating the GPL? What about the person who supplied the GPL simulator with
the compatible interface? What about the person who actually used the GPL
simulator with our proprietary software?
This is probably treading into grey areas of the GPL license that could best
be
clarified by the FSF (who I am considering sending a query to).
Reid
Partial thread listing:
- Re: [ng-spice] new guy: licensing issues, (continued)
Letter to Berkely CAD Group
Paolo Nenzi