[Bf-cycles] C++ API and the GPL

Dan Eicher dan at trollwerks.org
Thu Nov 17 04:51:47 CET 2011

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Tom M <letterrip at gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually one way to do it is to construct a BSD licensed standalone
> implementation of the API and then compile Octane against the
> standalone API.  As long as the standalone and Blender internal API
> are binary compatible it should work without there aren't likely any
> legal issues.
> Also it isn't even clear that the interpretation of the GPL that says
> no linking of proprietary software has any force here.  The GPL
> restricts those who redistribute Blender, and likely can't be used to
> enforce restrictions on 3rd parties usage of an API.
> LetterRip

After reading this
http://www.law.washington.edu/lta/swp/law/derivative.html I tend to

The main issue is if the renderer exporter is a 'derivative' of
blender, and therefore needs to be gpl'd, since the (theoretical) plan
is to call C/C++ functions exported through the makesrna generated
header files. The GPL FAQ (and BF 'gpl for artists' FAQ) says yes, it
must be gpl'd, while the above link says, according to copyright law,
it doesn't.

Confusing stuff this non-real property biz...


More information about the Bf-cycles mailing list