[cc65] License woes (was: how about commercial prgs?)

Date view Thread view Subject view

From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2002-03-31 10:46:00


On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 01:47:44AM +0100, MagerValp wrote:
> Now this I don't think is true. If I write an application and place it
> under the GPL, the compiler I use to compile the sources should not
> affect the license of my source code. If I write plain C code that
> compiles with any C compiler then it would somehow magically have to
> comply with all the different compiler licenses out there, regardless
> if anyone ever compiles it.

As I said before: It's not the compiler, it's the library, and it's not the
source but the binary that causes a problem. Your executable includes
statically linked code written by other people and covered by another library.
Because the code was written by other people, you cannot change the license at
will, as demanded by the GPL.

There are a few reasons why this may work with other compilers:

  1. They give permission to use the runtime library for any purpose and
     even relicense it.

  2. The runtime library is dynamically linked and therefore not part of the
     final program.

  3. The producer of the compiler does not care or does not realize that
     GPLing the binary is a violation of his copyright.

Just for clarification: This is not a problem with the cc65 license but with
the GPL. The problem is that the GPL forces anyone using GPLed code to place
all code under the GPL - which is not possible if you don't own all of the
code.

What you can do is to just distribute sources and no binaries. Provided that
the sources are yours, you may license them under the GPL. As long as binaries
are not distributed, the problematic clauses of the GPL do not hold, because
the statically linked library functions are not part of it. The problem with
this approach is that

  1. A user of your program must install and know how to use cc65, because she
     needs to compile your program before being able to use it.

  2. Even passing the binary to a friend is a copyright violation, because
     the binary must be GPLed, but it cannot, because it does contain code
     with another license.


Disclaimer: I'm no lawyer, so feel free to correct me where necessary.

Regards


        Uz


-- 
Ullrich von Bassewitz                                  uz_at_musoftware.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.


Date view Thread view Subject view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-03-31 10:49:00 CEST