Common Public License (CPL) and static linking

views:

247

answers:

+2 Q:

Common Public License (CPL) and static linking

Is it possible to statically link a library released under the CPL into a commerical application?

I'm contemplating using the libqxt library which is released under both the lgpl and cpl licenses. However the cpl license is a tad unclear as to whether it needs to be dynamically linked (as required by lgpl).

I've checked the cpl faq on the ibm website and it doens't make anything about the license terms any clearer.

+3 A:

The CPL allows the binary to be relicensed to whatever license you want as long as the source remains under the CPL. This means you could convert the binary to a proprietary license and there are no linking restrictions -- meaning that static linking is okay. It's the reason we picked the CPL to begin with.

2009-09-25 15:36:01

hi, thanks for the answer. If i read this right does that mean that since we'll be statically linking the binaries etc under a different license that we don't need to ship the source to libqxt on request? (We're quite happy saying that its being used).

Bob 2009-09-25 16:50:35

No, you do still need to make Qxt's source available on request -- specifically, the code used to build your program. You do not, however, need to ensure that the recipient can rebuild your program using a modified version like the LGPL requires. This is generally acceptable for commercial software, as responding to the occasional e-mail has a negligible cost.

2009-09-29 17:49:07

Good source about various licenses: http://www.codeproject.com/info/Licenses.aspx

DSblizzard 2010-09-23 21:51:23

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

Common Public License (CPL) and static linking

related questions