Licenses

[ZiNgA BuRgA]

(08-06-2012 12:44 PM)Sama34 Wrote:  What about using GPL/LGPL in non open source scripts? AFAIU GPL can't, but what about including LGPL? Is it possible?

Yes, the whole point of LGPL is to include a provision to allow inclusion into non-free packages.
Note that you can ONLY do this if the LGPL component is unmodified.  If it has been modified and you distribute it, you must supply all rights granted by the LGPL license to users.

Example:
MyBB under LGPL
- I can add functionality to MyBB and not release it under a GPL compatible license (eg sell product under closed license) - as long as I have not modified MyBB itself

If MyBB is under GPL, I would need to release my modifications under GPL compatible license.

(08-06-2012 12:44 PM)Sama34 Wrote:  I had read some comments about whether MyBB premium plugins can really exist (probably from when MyBB was GPL and not LGPL), I will assume than, since premium plugins are included by the MyBB script, there is nothing wrong with them?

Plugins and MyBB aren't the same package, so GPL doesn't magically infest itself into a completely separate package.  Just because a plugin is meant to be used with MyBB doesn't mean it's affiliated with it.  It's possible, for example, to have a plugin which works with multiple forum systems under different licensing schemes.
If I were to distribute MyBB along with plugins with incompatible licenses, for example, then you would have an issue.

(08-06-2012 12:44 PM)Sama34 Wrote:  I don't , or at least no that I intent to release it, I just meant using GPL code into my own that is under a private license (no open source).

* I will assume "Open Source" is the code that you can "read, edit, and redistribute" with no problem (ie: GPL) and not code that is under a private license even if this is free (since most of those allow you to edit but not to redistribute).

Note that, in the context of licenses, "free" often refers to open source.  Closed source, or as you call it, 'private license', is generally considered "non-free".  Whether monetary compensation is required to use it is irrelevant.  Open source applications can be sold (eg RHEL), and closed source can be given away without cost.

Generally open source licenses only put restrictions on redistribution.  You are free to do absolutely anything you want with open source applications - minus some things in regards to redistribution.  In the case of GPL (the most restrictive), your redistributing a GPL'd work gives end users the same rights as you do.
If you aren't redistributing anything (ie modifying for private use), then you don't have to worry about any restrictions with open source licenses.

As for non-free licenses, it will depend on the license, but if you're not redistributing the code, it's probably difficult to tell that you've made modifications and ultimately, the owner probably won't care anyway.