Combining GPLed code with codes of other licenses

[Joseph Hick]

I have some queries regarding the GNU GPL licenses.

The GNU website lists some licenses as compatible and
some as not-compatible to GNU GPL license.

Am I legally not allowed to combine GPLed code and
non-GPL-compatible-license-ed code together in one
project, compile them as one executable and distribute
the project as an open source project?


       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php

[Arnoud Engelfriet-2]

Joseph Hick wrote:
> Am I legally not allowed to combine GPLed code and
> non-GPL-compatible-license-ed code together in one
> project, compile them as one executable and distribute
> the project as an open source project?

If you create a derivative work of GPL code and non-GPL-compatible-licensed
code, you will find that there is at least one requirement in the
incompatible license that contradicts the GPL. So that means you cannot
comply with both the GPL and with the other, incompatible license when
distributing the derivative work. Distributing a work without complying with
the relevant licenses is an infringement of copyright and/or a violation of
the license contract (depending on jurisdiction).

Arnoud

--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
              Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/

[Joseph Hick]

Thanks for your response. a related question just for
the sake of knowledge.

take for example, a n00by programmer who does not have
a good understanding of licenses combined codes from
different licenses and released it. What are the legal
implications in the following cases:-

1. The programmer combined GPLed code with code
covered under an incompatible license, added his own
code and released the work under GPL license.

2. Same as above, but he released the work under the
incompatible license.

what are the penalties the programmer or its
*users*[1] might have to pay if he refuses to
discontinue such distributions and decides to
continue?

[1] need to know about users because I want to know
whether the users of such dubious projects are at
risk.




--- Arnoud Engelfriet <arnoud@...> wrote:

> Joseph Hick wrote:
> > Am I legally not allowed to combine GPLed code and
> > non-GPL-compatible-license-ed code together in one
> > project, compile them as one executable and
> distribute
> > the project as an open source project?
>
> If you create a derivative work of GPL code and
> non-GPL-compatible-licensed
> code, you will find that there is at least one
> requirement in the
> incompatible license that contradicts the GPL. So
> that means you cannot
> comply with both the GPL and with the other,
> incompatible license when
> distributing the derivative work. Distributing a
> work without complying with
> the relevant licenses is an infringement of
> copyright and/or a violation of
> the license contract (depending on jurisdiction).
>
> Arnoud
>
> --
> Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney
> - Speaking only for myself
> Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies:
> http://www.iusmentis.com/
>               Arnoud blogt nu ook:
> http://blog.iusmentis.com/
>
>

       
____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat?
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/

[John Cowan]

Joseph Hick scripsit:

> 1. The programmer combined GPLed code with code covered under an
> incompatible license, added his own code and released the work under
> GPL license.
>
> 2. Same as above, but he released the work under the incompatible
> license.
>
> what are the penalties the programmer or its *users*[1] might have
> to pay if he refuses to discontinue such distributions and decides
> to continue?

Mostly the programmer would have to live with the knowledge that he was
not a morally worthy person; if the facts were to be discovered, there
would also be a large amount of public opprobrium available to go around.

In the U.S. at least, unless the copyright is registered with the
Copyright Office (something which few individual programmers are likely
to bother with), only actual damages can be collected in such a case,
and actual damages are almost certainly $0 when dealing with a program
distributed by both the originator and the infringer at a price of $0.

Nothing would happen to the users.  At most, if the copyright owner were
to sue, it might be that by settlement (or conceivably by injunction)
the infringer would be required to notify the users that the program is
infringing and ask them to stop using it.

I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice.

--
Is a chair finely made tragic or comic? Is the          John Cowan
portrait of Mona Lisa good if I desire to see           cowan@...
it? Is the bust of Sir Philip Crampton lyrical,         http://ccil.org/~cowan
epical or dramatic?  If a man hacking in fury
at a block of wood make there an image of a cow,
is that image a work of art? If not, why not?               --Stephen Dedalus

[Matthew Flaschen]

John Cowan wrote:
> Joseph Hick scripsit:
>
>> 1. The programmer combined GPLed code with code covered under an
>> incompatible license, added his own code and released the work under
>> GPL license.

IANAL, but this would be a violation of the incompatible license.

>> 2. Same as above, but he released the work under the incompatible
>> license.

This would be a violation of the GPL.

>> what are the penalties the programmer or its *users*[1] might have
>> to pay if he refuses to discontinue such distributions and decides
>> to continue?

I think this is unlikely in the long term.  Either the distributor will
stop under pressure, or if the copyright holder presses it, a court will
force the distributor to stop with an injunction.

> Mostly the programmer would have to live with the knowledge that he was
> not a morally worthy person; if the facts were to be discovered, there
> would also be a large amount of public opprobrium available to go around.

Some copyright holders, such as the FSF, will definitely consider legal
action if you ignore requests to comply.

Matt Flaschen

[John Cowan]

Matthew Flaschen scripsit:

> Some copyright holders, such as the FSF, will definitely consider legal
> action if you ignore requests to comply.

For sure.  But the question was about "a programmer", suggesting a
typical individual OSS hacker.

--
[W]hen I wrote it I was more than a little              John Cowan
febrile with foodpoisoning from an antique carrot       cowan@...
that I foolishly ate out of an illjudged faith          http://ccil.org/~cowan
in the benignancy of vegetables.  --And Rosta