[Bf-committers] GPL + Python, revisited
Martin Poirier
theeth at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 1 17:36:42 CEST 2009
Hi,
--- On Wed, 4/1/09, Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org> wrote:
> Internal or external doesn't matter; the issue is that
> *only* using our
> Python API doesn't make a script GPL. For all other
> calls to
> modules/libs/etc the GPL still applies.
>
> There's still a grey-ish area though; In my opinion the
> dividing line
> is here;
>
> OK is:
> Creator publishes a Blender script mixed with own code,
> under own
> license.
>
> Not OK is:
> Creator publishes a Blender script, calling a library with
> own code,
> under own license.
>
> OK is:
> Creator publishes a Blender script, that calls scripts with
> own code,
> under own license.
I don't quite understand the distinction between those three. Whether his own code is in a library or not, he still has the copyright and can license as he wishes. That is, as long as he doesn't use any other code/bindings/libraries, the GPL exception for Blender's Python API applies and he can license as he wants.
> The divider I think is "If the script runs in our own
> Interpretor".
> When the script calls code not running in our
> "Interpretor" you are
> making bindings to other facilities.
But if the other facilities are under his copyright, he can still license them as he wants, so I don't understand the difference (or rather, why you are trying to divide those two).
Martin
__________________________________________________________________
Instant Messaging, free SMS, sharing photos and more... Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger at http://ca.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
More information about the Bf-committers
mailing list