20 Apr
2023
20 Apr
'23
3:33 p.m.
On 20 Apr 2023, at 14:07, Victor Seva
<linuxmaniac(a)torreviejawireless.org> wrote:
Signed PGP part
On 20/4/23 13:20, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Ah, OK. Yes, indeed but there's no explicit license on the binary deb, AFAIK.
If you go back in this thread, you’ll see that my SBOM tools found a long list of licenses
in the debian package, which is
why I started this discussion… They are using Debian packaging to find out about the
licenses and thus provide bad information.
/O
On 20 Apr
2023, at 12:57, Victor Seva <linuxmaniac(a)torreviejawireless.org> wrote:
On 18/4/23 11:02, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
The wonders of GPL. It’s sticky. Even if you have
other licenses (provided they are compatible) in the source code then the product itself
is all GPL.
So if I create a product and license it under GPLv2, and one of the source files is BSD,
the compiled binary will be only GPLv2.
No part of the compiled product is BSD any more. GPL kind of sticks to it all.
BUT if you only look at the source code, and not the binary. I can create a product,
license it under BSD and take one of the source
files from kamailio and include it.
* If that file is licensed under BSD, my product can be BSD when compiled and used.
* If that file is licensed under GPLv2, my product will be GPLv2 when used. Regardless of
the license of my source code.
So the source package can have a list of licenses, but in my view the binary package can
not.
The stickyness include loading of .so modules - dynamic linking.
This is why we can’t use GPLv2 licensed code when creating commercial products. Other
licenses work fine. LGPL is another story.
I’m not a lawyer, but have spent many years in these kind of discussions. Happy if wrong.
:-) Sorry, life got in the way, but I’m coming back
to this discussion…
I think we should
* List all licenses per file in the sources package (as is done now)
* Only use GPL v2 in the compiled (binary) packages
The copyright is the same in both, but the license is in fact different.
Uh, what do you mean? How the license of compiled package is different from the ones in
the source?
In general, no part of a compiled Kamailio can be
distributed under BSD. There may be one of the internal libraries that could be unaffected
by the GPL,
but anyway, when the customer links in in memory to Kamailio it’s still GPL.
Now I'm really confused :-(