[Bf-committers] GPL + Python, revisited

[Ton Roosendaal]

Hi,

As usual with licenses, you more you think about it, the more unclear 
it gets. :)

What I tried to achieve to only exclude the scripting language 
*definition*, so you can license scripts that use this as you wish. But 
only when used as 'interpreted data'.

However, if you use such scripts to link it to "other facilities" the 
GPL limitations apply.

This would be same case as if you would code a GPL BASIC interpreter. 
The programs people write are free to use, but they cannot extend it 
with "other facilities". It's the famous plug-in debate.

If that construct is not logically possible, we should redefine this 
all...

-Ton-

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ton Roosendaal  Blender Foundation   ton at blender.org    www.blender.org
Blender Institute BV  Entrepotdok 57A  1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands

On 1 Apr, 2009, at 17:36, Martin Poirier wrote:

>
> 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/
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>