[IAEP] 3 questions about Sugar Desktop Copyleft

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Dave Crossland (2016-04-20 15:47:33)
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/FAQ#What_are_the_principles_that_guide_Sugar_Labs.3F 
> says
> 
> What are the principles that guide Sugar Labs?
> 
> Sugar Labs subscribes to principle that learning thrives within a 
> culture of freedom of expression, hence it has a natural affinity with 
> the free software movement (Please see Principles page in this wiki 
> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs#Principles for more details). 
> The core Sugar platform has been developed under a GNU General Public 
> License (GPL); individual activities may be under different licenses.
> 
> 
> That last sentence seems really weird to me, because as I understand 
> the GPL, and I Am Not A Lawyer, then if Sugar is GPL, all Activities 
> must be under GPL compatible libre software licenses.

There is _granted_ license of sourcecode, and there is _effective_ 
license of combined work.

An activity with GPL-compatible liberal license (e.g. Expat a.k.a. MIT) 
is at runtime effectively GPL if linking with the GPL code.

Note that e.g. communicating via DBus likely is not judged "linking".

Liberal license is effective when code is a) reused in source form (e.g. 
forked for a BSD-based project), and b) if being granted an alternative 
license for the otherwise copyleft-licensed code.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160420/73fd4437/attachment.sig>