Re: [Chicken-users] Eggs and licensing?

[Peter Wright]

On 04/03 22:47:18, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> I apologize if the answer to this question is obvious; it isn't to me.

The answer is (sort of) obvious, but can be a bit counter-intuitive.

> If I use an egg in my code (in the sense of "(require-extension
> egg)") but do not modify or redistribute it in any way (i.e. my code
> generates a website), and the egg is GPLd, does that infect my code?

No.

> I gather there's some provision for linking to GPLd stuff rather
> than actually using it as code qua code, but I don't understand it
> very well.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that, but the key thing is that
your code is not being distributed.

If you were writing an application that you needed to *distribute*,
then it'd be a different case - as then you'd (presumably) need to
distribute the GPLed egg(s) along with your application. And that'd
require you to follow the terms of that license (ie. all your code
would have to be made available under the GPL).

> I want to start a closed-source, commercial website, so GPL
> infection is totally not OK.

If you're not distributing your app, it doesn't apply.

It may be worth noting that there's a variant of the GPL which
specifically deals with this situation - it's called [brief pause to
google] the Affero GPL
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License).

It looks like version 3 of the GPL has an *optional* clause with the
same effect as the GPL
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Version_3),
but I don't think this should matter for your purposes.

Though check the licensing docs of the specific eggs to make sure.

> -Robin

I'm not a legal expert, this is just my understanding of the GPL. Note
that "what some guy on the internet said" does not carry a great deal
of weight in legal circles. :-)

Pete.
-- 
"Why should I have to WORK for everything?! It's like saying I don't
deserve it!"    -- Calvin