| Obligations if I copy EPL'd source code and include in commercial product [message #12447] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 19:45  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rncabral.oi.com.br
Hi,
I'd like to know more details about the case covered on Question 22 at
http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php#SRCREDIST
# What are my obligations if I copy source code obtained
from eclipse.org and licensed under the Eclipse Public
License and include it in my product that I then distribute?
The answer says that source code licensed under the EPL may only be
redistributed under the EPL.
How does that work in practice ? Say, only 2 or 3 classes on my product
are modifications of EPL classes. I only need to release the source code
for these 3 ?
Best regards,
Ricardo.
|
|
|
| Re: Obligations if I copy EPL'd source code and include in commercial product [message #12468 is a reply to message #12447] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 20:18  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: askme.fake.net
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:45:36 -0200, Ricardo Niederberger Cabral wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to know more details about the case covered on Question 22 at
> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php#SRCREDIST
>
> # What are my obligations if I copy source code obtained from eclipse.org
> and licensed under the Eclipse Public License and include it in my
> product that I then distribute?
>
> The answer says that source code licensed under the EPL may only be
> redistributed under the EPL.
>
> How does that work in practice ? Say, only 2 or 3 classes on my product
> are modifications of EPL classes. I only need to release the source code
> for these 3 ?
>
> Best regards,
> Ricardo.
Best to ask such a question on eclipse.foundation
I would say that nobody can answer that question fully though.
For sure those classes must be under EPL now. But as for the rest of
them, who knows really. Not much difference between a jar of classes and
a class itself. What constitutes a 'work'. The EPL leaves this
definition generally up to the courts and outside of the realm of software.
Personally, I would not mix any EPL classes with other classes of my
program. I have done this in one of my plugins, and I consider that
plugin to be borderline requiring EPL. Basically I am not sure about it
and to preserve the integrity of my main code, I keep that stuff seperate.
dnoyeb
|
|
|
| Re: Obligations if I copy EPL'd source code and include in commercial product [message #563391 is a reply to message #12447] |
Tue, 30 January 2007 20:18 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: askme.fake.net
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:45:36 -0200, Ricardo Niederberger Cabral wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to know more details about the case covered on Question 22 at
> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php#SRCREDIST
>
> # What are my obligations if I copy source code obtained from eclipse.org
> and licensed under the Eclipse Public License and include it in my
> product that I then distribute?
>
> The answer says that source code licensed under the EPL may only be
> redistributed under the EPL.
>
> How does that work in practice ? Say, only 2 or 3 classes on my product
> are modifications of EPL classes. I only need to release the source code
> for these 3 ?
>
> Best regards,
> Ricardo.
Best to ask such a question on eclipse.foundation
I would say that nobody can answer that question fully though.
For sure those classes must be under EPL now. But as for the rest of
them, who knows really. Not much difference between a jar of classes and
a class itself. What constitutes a 'work'. The EPL leaves this
definition generally up to the courts and outside of the realm of software.
Personally, I would not mix any EPL classes with other classes of my
program. I have done this in one of my plugins, and I consider that
plugin to be borderline requiring EPL. Basically I am not sure about it
and to preserve the integrity of my main code, I keep that stuff seperate.
dnoyeb
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06646 seconds
Home