Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>Even though <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/paul/being-acquitted-versus-being-searched-yanal" rel="nofollow noreferrer">I Am Not A Lawyer</a>, from my take on the GPL, IMO, the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">GPLv3</a> is absolutely incompatible with App Store distribution solely because of paragraph 3, I quote:</p> <blockquote> <h3>3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.</h3> <p>No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article 11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such measures.</p> <p>When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of technological measures.</p> </blockquote> <p>Basically, AFAIK, that means the device must be completely open for anyone to install and use their modifications of your source code on the device.</p> <p>This paragraph does not, however, exist in the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">GPLv2</a>. Which is the license I've choosen for <a href="http://gorillas.lyndir.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Gorillas</a> because for as far as I can tell, it is compatible. I'm sure that should someone decide it isn't and take it to court anything could happen, but technically; the GPL has never even seen court (at least, not as far as I know). If Apple decides, one day, to explicitly mention the GPL as incompatible because THEY cannot abide to its terms of distribution, then they might tell us not to license it as such and I'll be switching over to <a href="http://www.sun.com/cddl/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">CDDL</a> or so.</p> <p>As for the other licenses you mention; those are perfectly OK. They have nowhere near as heavy restrictions as the GPL does.</p> <p>FYI, here's a fairly nice comparison of some licenses:</p> <p><a href="http://blogs.oracle.com/chandan/entry/copyrights_licenses_and_cddl_illustrated" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Copyrights, Licenses and CDDL Illustrated</a></p> <p>By the way, you can also take any of these great licenses (including the GPLv3) and adapt it to make it compatible (provided they are not copyrighted) or use them for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_license" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dual-licensing</a>.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload