Where Fedora Went Wrong (nice conclusion)

[Matthew Saltzman]

On Fri, 18 May 2007, Ric Moore wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 12:52 +0930, Tim wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 17:38 -0700, Les wrote:
>>> One thing I am still not clear about.... If someone (like me)
>>> creates some whooptidoo program that does something wonderful, can
>>> he/she sell that program commercially?  Or is that code automatically
>>> under GPL because it is designed on Linux?
>>
>> Isn't that two issues?  You can sell what you create, but GPL licensing
>> and conditions go along for the ride.
>
> My take on it all is that what is created under the GPL is freely given
> away, but you are certainly free to charge whatever the market will bear
> to hire your expertise in utilizing your program. Certainly if it is the
> Next Thing, does extremely useful stuff and gives value, you will find
> your services in demand. For a lot of folks, having successfully sired
> an Open Source project is the fast-track to a great job with plenty of
> perks. Having a regular paycheck is no small thing.

There is *nothing anywhere* that requires you to license software you 
create using Linux or the GNU toolchain under the GPL.  Whether your work 
inherits the GPL depends entirely on whether it is a "derived work" of a 
GPL program.  The GPL has a fairly (some would say overly, some would say 
unenforcably) broad definition of "derived work", but the simple act of 
creating your program using Linux or the GNU the toolchain does not fall 
under that definition.

What libraries you link to has an impact.  But the standard 
system/language libraries generally do not enforce the GPL on code that 
links to them, either because of the execption in the GPL for the case 
where alternative libraries with the same functionality exist or because 
of explicit exceptions in their licenses.

The point of the LGPL is that it explicitly does not impose licensing 
conditions on code that links to LGPL libraries simply by virtue of 
linking to them.  The GPL does impose such conditions, but there are 
exceptions.

There is no requirement in the GPL that you give away your work.  There 
*is* a requirement that you allow others who receive your work to have 
access to the source and to redistribute it.  In many cases (but not all), 
that may drive the price of the software itself toward zero.  But 
there are many ways to make money on software other than selling licenses 
to use the executable itself.

HTH.  Of course, IANAL.

>
> Becoming renown  ...priceless. :) Ric
>

-- 
 		Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs