[PD] gpl vs creative commons
IOhannes m zmoelnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Tue Jan 29 09:08:18 CET 2008
Roman Haefeli wrote:
> ask a lawyer to check in detail, if this is true. however, if licenses
> could cross 'levels of abstractions' in the sense of pd patches being
> affected by the license of pd,
afaik, licenses do not cross "levels of abstractions".
however, if i have a collection of abstractions published under the GPL,
then i think i don't cross this magical border.
next comes the question, what is the difference between an abstraction
and an external non-abstraction object. afaik, GPL does not dissolve
just because of languages used. (that is: porting of code from one
language to another is (to my knowledge) not really affected by the GPL
(e.g.: you can chose the license again) as it usually involves re-coding
an algorithm rather than re-using pieces of code.; but this is unrelated
to the language a library is written in)
finally, i am still unsure about the "static linking" clause, and how it
affects an interpreted language.
i guess, if you have a patch that depends on a GPL'ed pdlib, and you
are distributing your patch with this library (e.g. for convencience
reasons), then you are kind of _statically linking_ and thus your patch
is automatically GPL'ed too.
but i really don't know
More information about the Pd-list