tags:

views:

155

answers:

3
+1  A: 

This will usually mean that if you build a patch or other modification of the program and want to distribute it you must also publish the sources of that modification under a license explicitly mentioned in the program license text.

In some license types this includes both the other program and any program using that (including your program). In others (like LGPL) this will only be required only for modification made to that program, but not to your program if they are separated (LGPL is typically used for libraries and doesn't enforce publishing the library consumers).

sharptooth
Are you saying that some licenses would require me to release my code along with any bug fix code I wrote? If so, do you know which that would be (so I can avoid it, haha)?
ChrisC
I would say any that are classed as "Viral" licenses, such as the GPL
a_m0d
@ChrisC: Yes, if you want to redistribute the bug fix. If you just need to patch something and only use it in-house you don't need to do so. GPL certainly requires that and other licenses too to some extent - look for words concerning "derived works" in the license. Usually the "derived works" must be redistributed under certain conditions explicitly mentioned there and requiring publishing the source under the same license. And patches/bug fixes/enhancements/alterations/tunings are derived works.
sharptooth
@ChrisC: What you do to avoid having to release your code is to not use software with a license that requires this. But if everyone did that, there would be no open source software at all ... and you would be forking out bucks to someone to license the libraries you now get to use for free!
Stephen C
+1  A: 

simply:

you can sell (and release with your own commercial license) your own app built with the provided code.

but:

you can not improve on the code (of the software you are using within your app) directly and not give it to public domain (usually it is in the original license of the software).

b0x0rz
+1  A: 

Instead of relying on those summaries, you would be advised to carefully read the license for any open source license you plan to use in a closed source product.

For instance, LGPL does not actually require you to release source code changes to the public domain. Rather, it requires you to release them under the terms of the LGPL.

If you are nor sure that you understand the implications of a particular license, talk to your company's lawyers.

Stephen C
+1. A very important point. Releasing into public domain is not the same as publishing under a certain license.
sharptooth