GPL / LGPL drives me mad

Printable View

April 18th, 2004, 08:35 AM
highhead

GPL / LGPL drives me mad

hello,
has anybody ever understood those licensing mumbojumbo ?

what I want to do:
i have a windows-software and want to port it to linux. I don't want to give it away for free (am I the bad guy now ? ;) ). Now I am in desperate search for some gui-toolkit, that gives me the ability to get all those nice little buttons, menus, dialogs and so on to linux. It is not neccessary, that I have nothing to change for the linux-port, as I am currently using win32api for the windows-version.

a first "success":
I stumbled over a toolkit, that works under windows and also linux. it is called wxwidgets (formerly known as wxwindows). some guys on the web advised it to me as "the best one" for my needs. and it would be nice: it looks good, and if I changed my windows-classes to wxwidgets, I could use the same c++-classes for my linux-port.

what stopped me from being happy:
ok, with my borland c++ builder for windows I know that I don't have to care about licensing anything when deploying my software. I may charge money, I may give it away for free... no problems. Even some files that must be shipped with some kind of application are no problem. but if I use wxwidgets (and I think any other thing that is under GPL/LGPL) everything changes as I understood from the bunch of cryptical text I had to read in those license-monsters. In fact at the end I had understood NOTHING !

my question(s):
what REALLY do I have to think about if I use libraries like wxwidgets in a COMERCIAL product. Am I allowed to do that ? Do I have to give my sourcecodes to the public ? Do I have to place a remark in a help-file, about-dialog or readme-file, that my software uses (for example) wxwidgets ? What is your advise what I should do, or which library suits my needs best.

thank you for your help

highhead
April 18th, 2004, 03:26 PM
kasracer

3rd link down from a google search with "wxWidgets commercial" gives you a paragraph on the wx site stating you can do what you are thinking of doing.

Also, it doesn't make you a bad guy for charging money for a program you wrote. The thing is, I'm willing to bet there are about 30 free, open-source alternatives to your program already written for linux.
April 18th, 2004, 06:17 PM
highhead

Hi Kasracer

That argument makes me laugh :lol:
Yeah, there is CocaCola, Pepsi Cola on the market, so why another cola ? Or better: There are allready 2 supermarkets in our town, why do you want to start another ?
or think about all those companies that build cars.
So what ? And how can you judge even if you don't know anything about the kind of software I code ?
Your argument seems very strange to me: Everything is allready available for linux ? so why are there programming-languages for linux and ide's ? nobody needs them ! Everything is complete ! It's retirement time for coders ! ahh you make me laugh. :D
And you hint with google didn't get me any further !
Is the linux-comunity so unfriendly ?
April 18th, 2004, 08:42 PM
kasracer

Re: Hi Kasracer

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
Yeah, there is CocaCola, Pepsi Cola on the market, so why another cola ? Or better: There are allready 2 supermarkets in our town, why do you want to start another ?
or think about all those companies that build cars.
So what ?

Wow, those totally do not parallel what I said. Question, are there 30 different, free colas out there? Are there free cars out there? No there isn't.

You can't just compare your product (which users pay for) to other products that are free and say it's just another cola because all colas cost money.

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
Your argument seems very strange to me: Everything is allready available for linux ?

My arguement? I don't have an arguement, I just started something fyi incase you didn't sell many copies and were wondering why.

Obviously not everything has been made for linux, but If something doesn't exist for linux, it probably doesn't exist for Windows (software wise, not games though you can play most games on Linux) either.

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
so why are there programming-languages for linux and ide's ?

Wait, you made software in C++ but you said "linux has programming languages"?

:(:(:(:(:(

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
And you hint with google didn't get me any further !

Type in what I told you to, click the 3rd link. It says right there in a Q&A structured document. It can't be any simplier unless I copied and pasted it here for you, but you called me mean so I think you can handle it :D
April 18th, 2004, 10:43 PM
khp

Quick and dirty explanation of GPL/LGPL.

1. You can charge whatever you want for your software.
2. You don't have to show any of your code to the public.
3. When using libraries licenced under the GPL you have to give, anyone you sell your program to, the source code to your program, and your code must be under a GPL licence. So anyone you sell your program to will be free to distribute it to the world for free.
4. When using libraries licenced under the LGPL you don't have to give, the source code to your program, to anyone. You only have to show the source code, for any changes you have made to the libraries them selves, not the code that just uses the libraries. And you can put whatever licence you want on the parts of your program that only uses LGPL libraries.
April 19th, 2004, 05:41 AM
highhead

Thanks KHP

That's exactly what I needed nothing else.

Thank you again

highhead
April 19th, 2004, 05:48 AM
highhead

TO KASRACER

Ok, as I see you are one of those "EVERYTHING FOR FREE"-fanatics.

Do you have to work for a living ? I don't think so, because otherwise you would know, that not everybody is free to work and give the rssults as a gift to the "worldwide comunity".

People like me are working to pay the rent, having something to eat ans so on.

The most freeware coders and people that coder opensource-software I know are students. I'm so sorry for not beeing a student my whole life.

What you forget in addition are the "few little" commercial products for linux.
April 19th, 2004, 06:30 AM
Yves M

Quote:

When using libraries licenced under the GPL you have to give, anyone you sell your program to, the source code to your program, and your code must be under a GPL licence. So anyone you sell your program to will be free to distribute it to the world for free.

Hum, when using GPLed source code, you have to make your program available for free as well if I'm not mistaken. You can charge for copying/distributing costs however.

Moderator note:
By the way, the questions whether or not there already are GPLed programs that do what your program will do and whether it's bad to charge for software don't quite have their place here. In any case, please keep the conversation cordial.
April 19th, 2004, 02:09 PM
khp

Quote:

Originally posted by Yves M
Hum, when using GPLed source code, you have to make your program available for free as well if I'm not mistaken.

No, this is wrong.

Quote:

Originally posted by Yves M
You can charge for copying/distributing costs however.

No, you can charge, whatever you want for your program, not just enugh to cover distribution costs. The GLP does not make software free as in beer.

A quote from the GPL FAQ

Quote:

Q: Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?
A: Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies is part of the definition of free software.
April 19th, 2004, 02:51 PM
Yves M

Yes, fair enough. The thing is that as soon as one user pays for it, he can redistribute it for free.

Quote:

Q: Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me?

A:No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the definition of free software.

The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a fee for doing so.

So in essence, if you don't make your GPLed program available for free to the public, any third party that has obtained a copy of the program along with the source can do so at their will.
April 19th, 2004, 03:03 PM
kasracer

Re: TO KASRACER

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
Ok, as I see you are one of those "EVERYTHING FOR FREE"-fanatics.

No I'm not. I actually have a decent idea for a piece of software I was considering developing to sell, but I still don't know if I am going to.

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
Do you have to work for a living ?

Yes. yes I do

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
The most freeware coders and people that coder opensource-software I know are students. I'm so sorry for not beeing a student my whole life.

Not all people involved are students. In fact, I'd say most are not because most students don't know enough yet to make certain applications that some open-source groups are making.
April 19th, 2004, 04:34 PM
highhead

to kasracer

Ok, i apologize for my "assault" ;) at you.
I'm just a little bit bored of all those people telling me that commerial software is a baaad thing, all the time since I am thinking about porting something to linux. some of them are very agressive people. they often seem to be some kind of fanatics.

but after the facts Ives posted ago, I think I'll stay away from using some LGPL-stuff. It seems to be too much messin' around to build something or porting something to linux or other operating-systems that are gpl-dominated, since there seems to be no kind of Win32-API-style API in linux, that I can use for building a GUI.

thanks for your opinion and patience

highhead
April 21st, 2004, 04:00 AM
Yves M

Hum, I think we may have put you off with the discussion about GPL. The LGPL is more liberal and you can indeed create commercial programs which use it. Another thing you can use is QT, but it's rather expensive (2000$ depending on what you get) for commercial programs.
April 21st, 2004, 06:07 AM
highhead

To Ives

Hmm, that's what I understood also about LGPL. And as far as I know, the wxwidgets- libraries are under LGPL. I'll give it a try.
QT is in fact expensive. Don't know how they get customers :D
April 21st, 2004, 07:49 AM
Yves M

Yeah, well I have been wondering that too. I've looked at tools to migrate our program to Linux and MacOS, and have evaluated QT a bit. It's certainly nicer than wxWidgets and more complete, but it's hard to justify the price
April 21st, 2004, 01:25 PM
kasracer

Re: To Ives

Quote:

Originally posted by highhead
Hmm, that's what I understood also about LGPL. And as far as I know, the wxwidgets- libraries are under LGPL. I'll give it a try.
QT is in fact expensive. Don't know how they get customers :D

Lots of very big companies use QT. All Adobe products use QT.

Also, the Linux and Mac versions are free and there is a free version of the windows version too but can only be used for non-commercial applications.
April 21st, 2004, 01:45 PM
Yves M

Really? Why do they sell you QT for Mac or Linux then? Is that only the integration tools for compiler IDEs or what?
April 21st, 2004, 01:56 PM
kasracer

Quote:

Originally posted by Yves M
Really? Why do they sell you QT for Mac or Linux then? Is that only the integration tools for compiler IDEs or what?

I don't know what their license is or anything so I got no idea. I take it you have to pay to use QT in any commercial application in any OS.
April 21st, 2004, 02:28 PM
Yves M

Oh, ok yes that makes more sense. I've just been wondering about your statement in the previous post that Mac and Linux versions of QT were free.
September 1st, 2004, 09:49 PM
HeartBreakKid

Re: GPL / LGPL drives me mad

I need to bring this back up, because I have a related question.

I am starting development of an application for a locally owned business. They need to keep the costs down (way down) for obvious reasons.

I want to release the software I create for them as a LGPL application, however I plan on doing all of the application development in Visual C++ (it's just faster that way, and I already have all the tools I need).

Looking over the GPL/LGPL verbage it states that I must release the source code and ALL OBJECT files to build the source code. Obviously I cannot distribute the object files (MFC, etc)... So does that mean that I cannot really release software developed in this environment under the GPL/LGPL?

I really MUST release it under this license, because to keep the costs down I will be using a MySQL backend, and to avoid licensing costs for MySQL I need to avoid a commercial license.

P.S. It's a bar/restaurant. I'm working out a "free trade" agreement ;)