It is possible to mix GPL and Proprietary
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 1
Although how this company suggests doing it is wrong, I think using GPL'd source code in proprietary projects is something that a lot of companies want to do. The gains are obvious. Reduced time. Reduced costs.
Everyone knows the difficulty. By using GPL'd software any modifications you make are also GPL'd and must be released as source code that anyone else can then freely use. Meaning any changes you make that would have otherwise been proprietary are now basically free beer for everyone else's consumption.
The solution, it seems to me, is to separate out whatever is proprietary and GPL. Convert Any GPL'd software you want to use into DLL's or whatever library fits the platform for which you are coding. The GPL will still compel you to release source for DLL conversion you made, but it will not compel you to release your proprietary source. Code that calls the DLL is not part of the DLL itself.
I think that everyone wins with this approach. Companies reduce costs. GPL'd source code gets easier to use, and most likely better maintained. Companies don't have to give away their source code for free. Everyone is happy.
This is also an ethical solution. Although some may disagree, I believe it honors the spirit of the GPL. The part that was free is kept free. The part you added can be licensed as you choose, and that is how things should be.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone knows the difficulty. By using GPL'd software any modifications you make are also GPL'd and must be released as source code that anyone else can then freely use. Meaning any changes you make that would have otherwise been proprietary are now basically free beer for everyone else's consumption.
The solution, it seems to me, is to separate out whatever is proprietary and GPL. Convert Any GPL'd software you want to use into DLL's or whatever library fits the platform for which you are coding. The GPL will still compel you to release source for DLL conversion you made, but it will not compel you to release your proprietary source. Code that calls the DLL is not part of the DLL itself.
I think that everyone wins with this approach. Companies reduce costs. GPL'd source code gets easier to use, and most likely better maintained. Companies don't have to give away their source code for free. Everyone is happy.
This is also an ethical solution. Although some may disagree, I believe it honors the spirit of the GPL. The part that was free is kept free. The part you added can be licensed as you choose, and that is how things should be.