[hipl-dev] Re: HIPL conforming to OpenSSL licensing terms?
- From: Diego Biurrun <diego@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hipl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:12:14 +0100
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 01:12:14PM +0100, Stefan Götz wrote:
>
> HIPL uses the OpenSSL toolkit which is covered by a mix of the Apache 1.1
> license and a custom license. It has the usual requirements on copyright
> notices
> and disclaimers being present in derived work, but I could not find any of
> that
> in any part of HIPL.
The OpenSSL license has an advertising clause that conflicts with the
GPL, similar to the one found in the original, 4-clause BSD license.
It's a very annoying detail with somewhat nasty consequences.
Here's a good summary of the situation:
http://people.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl.html
Here is why Debian demands an OpenSSL exception before including
software that links against OpenSSL in its archive:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/10/msg00173.html
> Also, the the GPLv2 license is incompatible at least with the Apache 1.1
> license.
GPL version 2 is incompatible with all versions of the Apache license
(1.0, 1.1, 2.0), GPL version 3 is incompatible with Apache 1.0 and 1.1,
but compatible with Apache 2.0.
> I'm not sure what the implications of this situation are but it might scare
> off
> potential users of HIPL.
Yes, licensing binds are the most difficult to disentangle once you are
in the middle of them...
Diego
Other related posts:
