Kinds of combined works License compatibility












(learn how , when remove template message)




license compatibility derived works , combined works of developer s own code , externally developed open-source-licensed code (adapted välimäki 2005)


a combined work consists of multiple differently-licensed parts (avoiding relicensing). achieve combined work including copyleft licensed components (which have viral property leading potentially derived work), proper isolation/separation needs maintained.


with individually licensed source code files, multiple non-reciprocal licenses (such permissive licenses or own proprietary code) can separated, while combined compiled program re-licensed (but not required). such source-code file separation weak copyleft/reciprocal licenses (such gpl), require complete work re-licensed under reciprocal license being derivative.


a stronger approach have separation @ linking stage binary object code (static linking), components of resulting program part of same process , address space. satisfies weak copyleft/standard reciprocal combined works (such lgpl licensed ones), not strong copyleft/strong reciprocal combined works. while commonly accepted linking (static , dynamic linking) constitutes derivative of strong copyleft d work, there alternate interpretations.


for combined works strong copyleft modules, stronger isolation required. can achieved separating programs own process , allowing communication via binary abis or other indirect means. examples android s kernel space-to-user space separation via bionic, or linux distros have proprietary binary blobs included despite having strong copyleft kernel.


while domains agreement exists if isolation suitable, there domains in dispute , untested in court. instance, in 2015 sfc sued vmware in ongoing dispute whether loadable kernel modules (lkm s) derivative works of gpl d linux kernel or not.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CACHEbox ApplianSys

Kinship systems Apache

Western Apache Apache