PHWinfo - Afficher un message - Logiciel sous licence GPL et logiciel commerciale.

03/07/2006, 10h56

Tintin92 <tintin922006-google@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Mais je suis un peu perdu sur ce site.
> Pouvez-vous être plus prècis en me disant ou je peux trouver des
> infos.

La "philosophie" de la FSF:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/pragmatic.html
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/...r-freedom.html

Les licences:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html

Dans tout celà et je n'ai pas trouvé grand chose d'autre, j'ai effectivement
l'impression que la FSF a restructuré son site pour faire disparaître les
choses précises qu'il y avait autrefois et les remplacer par un vague brouet
qui plait à tout le monde et ne dit rien de clair. Je dois donc m'excuser pour
avoir cité la fsf comme une source de renseignements précis, ou en tout cas je
ne sais pas où ils sont. Je suis certain d'y avoir vu des choses bien plus
précises, en particulier sur la distinction entre "derivative work" et
"mere aggregation".

J'ai trouvé une discussion que j'aime mieux ici:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft
En particulier:
"
Additionally, some popular copyleft licenses such as the GPL have an
"at-arms-length" clause specifying that copyleft components can interact with
non-copyleft components as long as the communication is relatively simple,
such as executing a command-line tool with a set of switches. As a
consequence, even if one module of an otherwise non-copyleft product is placed
under the GPL, it may still be legal for other components to communicate with
it in a limited fashion.
"

Tu peux aussi regarder ceci:
http://www.wxwidgets.org/wiki/index....f_Derived_Work
et ceci:
http://www.digital-law-online.info/l...reatise27.html
"
With dynamically-linked libraries, the application program being distributed
is no longer a compilation that includes the library. Because the library is
not being distributed with the application program, no permission is needed
from the copyright owner of the library for the distribution to users. Users
must, of course, be authorized to use the library, but if they are owners of a
copy of the library, under Section 117 they can make any adaptations of the
library necessary to use it with the application program.

Some have claimed that an application program that needs a library for its
operation is a derivative work of that library. They take that position
because the application program is based on the library because it was written
to use the subroutines and other aspects of the library.

Such a position is misplaced. Even though the definition of a derivative work
contained in Section 101 seems to support such a reading when it talks about a
derivative works being based upon one or more preexisting works, the examples
all illustrate derivative works where the original work is somehow
incorporated or recast in the derivative work:

A derivative work is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as
a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion
picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation,
or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A
work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other
modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is
a derivative work.
"

dont tu peux tirer des conclusions inverses de celles que tire la FSF. Bref
cette affaire du copyleft est un véritable champ de mines.

--

Michel TALON

03/07/2006, 10h56	#8
Michel Talon Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: Logiciel sous licence GPL et logiciel commerciale. Tintin92 <tintin922006-google@yahoo.fr> wrote: > Mais je suis un peu perdu sur ce site. > Pouvez-vous être plus prècis en me disant ou je peux trouver des > infos. La "philosophie" de la FSF: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/pragmatic.html http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/...r-freedom.html Les licences: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html Dans tout celà et je n'ai pas trouvé grand chose d'autre, j'ai effectivement l'impression que la FSF a restructuré son site pour faire disparaître les choses précises qu'il y avait autrefois et les remplacer par un vague brouet qui plait à tout le monde et ne dit rien de clair. Je dois donc m'excuser pour avoir cité la fsf comme une source de renseignements précis, ou en tout cas je ne sais pas où ils sont. Je suis certain d'y avoir vu des choses bien plus précises, en particulier sur la distinction entre "derivative work" et "mere aggregation". J'ai trouvé une discussion que j'aime mieux ici: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft En particulier: " Additionally, some popular copyleft licenses such as the GPL have an "at-arms-length" clause specifying that copyleft components can interact with non-copyleft components as long as the communication is relatively simple, such as executing a command-line tool with a set of switches. As a consequence, even if one module of an otherwise non-copyleft product is placed under the GPL, it may still be legal for other components to communicate with it in a limited fashion. " Tu peux aussi regarder ceci: http://www.wxwidgets.org/wiki/index....f_Derived_Work et ceci: http://www.digital-law-online.info/l...reatise27.html " With dynamically-linked libraries, the application program being distributed is no longer a compilation that includes the library. Because the library is not being distributed with the application program, no permission is needed from the copyright owner of the library for the distribution to users. Users must, of course, be authorized to use the library, but if they are owners of a copy of the library, under Section 117 they can make any adaptations of the library necessary to use it with the application program. Some have claimed that an application program that needs a library for its operation is a derivative work of that library. They take that position because the application program is based on the library because it was written to use the subroutines and other aspects of the library. Such a position is misplaced. Even though the definition of a derivative work contained in Section 101 seems to support such a reading when it talks about a derivative works being based upon one or more preexisting works, the examples all illustrate derivative works where the original work is somehow incorporated or recast in the derivative work: A derivative work is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a derivative work. " dont tu peux tirer des conclusions inverses de celles que tire la FSF. Bref cette affaire du copyleft est un véritable champ de mines. -- Michel TALON