Search Results

Search found 1038 results on 42 pages for 'licensing'.

Page 20/42 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • Can I use a previous version of iText(Sharp) under the LGPL?

    - by Jens
    I'd like to use iTextSharp for PDF manipulation. I need it to run under medium trust (webserver) and to be free of charge (sice this is a very small project), therefore there is not much competition. Unfortunately, since I need it for a commercial project, I cannot the AGPL introduced with version 5.0. Do you know if I may use the 4.x versions using the LGPL? Or is their license automatically updated to the APGL?

    Read the article

  • Does ASL License complies with MS-Pl license?

    - by John Simons
    I would like to redistribute a compiled version of Yahoo! UI Library: YUI Compressor for .Net (http://yuicompressor.codeplex.com), that according to the web site is licensed under MS-Pl (http://yuicompressor.codeplex.com/license). The project I work in is release under the terms of Apache Software Foundation License 2.0. According to the MS-Pl license "If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license." , the term complies is not very clear! Does ASL License complies with MS-Pl license?

    Read the article

  • Propietary modules within GPL and BSD kernels

    - by Francisco Garcia
    Since the Linux kernel is GPL and not LGPL I suppose that it is illegal to link proprietary code to it. How does the industry circumvents this? I would expect that the GPL license will force any developer to release under GPL driver and/or kernel module. Maybe I am confused and implementing a new module is not really linking against the kernel code ??? How do companies deal with this? Maybe linking the other way around (from kernel to their binaries)? On the other hand there is the BSD kernel. Where you are free to link protected IP. Can you get a better design implementing your drivers within a BSD kernel? Is there any design restriction when implementing drivers for GPL kernels?

    Read the article

  • iPhone App with Thirdparty Code - License Question

    - by hecta
    What do I need to include if my iPhone App uses some third party code under an opensource licence for example BSD or MIT, before submitting for AppStore approval? Is it enough if I let original code with it's comments untouched or do I need to include a readme file where I describe that I used "xyz's framekwork under licence abc" or something like that?

    Read the article

  • Combining GPL with MPL and BSD

    - by thr
    I have a software project I want to release under GPLv3, it uses two pieces of code that other parties have developed (one is the DLR by Microsoft, which is under the Microsoft Public License and the other piece of code is under the New BSD License). The BSD licensed code is compiled into the same binary as my code (but none of it is changed) The Ms-PL licensed code is compiled into another assembly next to my code and linked at runtime (and none of it is changed what so ever). Can I release my software under GPLv3 and without any legal problems?

    Read the article

  • Community License Agreement for Commercial (SaaS) software?

    - by indomitablehef
    I've got a commercial SaaS application, an online collaboration/lean project mgmt tool. I want to offer a "Community Edition", with specific limitations on how the software can be used, for free. For example free for groups using it to manage open source projects free to K-12 teachers to use in the classroom free for authors collaborating on Lean/Kanban/AgileSoftwareDevelopment books and research papers. free for community conference organizers, user group organizers, etc. The license would grant use of the software with limitations. The software itself can enforce limitations on the number of users/projects. I'm looking for a license agreement / EULA that I can use to specify what uses the software can be used for (see above). It would restrict the users from using it in different ways, such as for commercial use, managing consulting projects, client work, etc. I've been combing the web for good examples of such agreements, and so far coming up short. Any ideas? To be clear, this would not be an open source license of any kind. It would cover the use of commercial software, for specific "community" uses, as we define them.

    Read the article

  • virtualbox ose windows binaries

    - by Eye of Hell
    Hello Sun's virtualbox windows binaries are under 'non-commercial' license so can't be used in any company. But source code is GPL. Is it any resource on the network that has a virtualbox compiled binaries for windows? Added a bounty to see if I can get a little more feedback.

    Read the article

  • iPhone App with Thirdparty Code - Licence Question

    - by disp
    What do I need to include if my iPhone App uses some third party code under an opensource licence for example BSD or MIT, before submitting for AppStore approval? Is it enough if I let original code with it's comments untouched or do I need to include a readme file where I describe that I used "xyz's framekwork under licence abc" or something like that?

    Read the article

  • Securing against dynamic linking in .NET

    - by Henri
    I want to deploy an application with a license attached. However, I want to prevent that my dll can be easily referenced in visual studio. What are the usual ways of doing this? I was thinking about ngen-ing the application to prevent this, however, then the code becomes architecture dependent. Im not targetting any other architecture/platform besides windows, however, ngen-ing the application after making a release build seems like a workaround to me. Are there any other techniques to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Question regarding the ExtJS License

    - by stephemurdoch
    Let's say I create a CMS that uses ExtJS. I want to avoid the license fee, so I open-source the CMS on github. Now let's imagine that I make your friend Dave a website that uses my CMS. I spend three hundred hours designing a logo and designing the layout. Can I charge a fee for this, and would I be obliged to open-source Dave's website too or is it enough to just open-source the CMS? I find this LPGL license a little confusing. Say hi to Dave for me.

    Read the article

  • Is this scenario in compliance with GPLv3?

    - by Sean Kinsey
    For arguments sake, say that we create a web application , that depends on a GPLv3 licensed component, lets say Ext JS. Based on Section 0 of the license, the common notion is that the entire web application (the client side javascript) falls under the definition of a covered work: A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program. and that it will therefor have to be distributed under the same license Ok, so here comes the fun part: This is a short 'program' that is based on Ext JS var myPanel = new Ext.Panel(); The question that arises is: Have I now violated the GPL by not including the source of Ext JS and its license? Ok, so lets take another example <!doctype html> <html> <head> <title>my title</title> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://extjs.cachefly.net/ext-3.2.1/ext-all.js"> </script> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://extjs.cachefly.net/ext-3.2.1/resources/css/ext-all.css" /> <script type="text/javascript"> var myPanel = new Ext.Panel(); </script> </head> <body> </body> </html> Have I now violated the terms of the GPL? The code conveyed by me to you is in a non-functional state - it will have to be combined with the actual source of Ext JS, which you(your browser) will have to retrieve, from a source made public by someone else to be usable. Now, if the answer to the above is no, how does me conveying this code in visible form differ from the 'invisible' form conveyed by my web server? As a side note, a very similar thing is done in Linux with many projects that depends on less permissive licenses - the user has to retrieve these on its own and make these available for the primary lib/executable. How is this not the same if the user is informed on beforehand that he (the browser) will have to retrieve the needed resources from a different source? Just to make it clear, I'm pro FLOSS, and I have also published a number of projects licensed under more permissive licenses. The reason I'm asking this is that I still haven't found anyone offering a definitive answer to this.

    Read the article

  • Are Ms-PL and Apache License Version 2.0 Compatible?

    - by Carlos Díez
    I need to use two libraries in a commercial product that i'm developing at work. One library is under the Ms-PL license and the other is under Apache License Version 2.0. I know that Ms-PL is not compatible with GPL according to the FSF, and that the Apache License Version 2.0 is only compatible with GPLv3 (and not with GPLv1 or GPLv2). But i don't know if both licenses are compatible. Any help would be appreciated, even if it is that it is impossible :)

    Read the article

  • How should I measure Concurrent Licence Usage

    - by Andrew Wood
    Hi I have detailed stats on user access to my system detailing login and logout times as well as machine used, network username etc. I am in need of measuring what I would term a concurrent user licences level based on this information. Now I could take the maximum logged in for any 1 day in a 3 month period say 170 or I could take the average say 133. Does anyone have or know of a formula for working this out or is it as simple as the high water mark which is 170 in my example. A client has recently gone from an unlimited licence to a concurrent licence so I am faced with the task of setting the initial licence level. There is potential for more licence sales in the future so I don't want it set to high and I do want it based on historical data that the system collects rather than guess work.

    Read the article

  • Someone selling my GPL theme

    - by PaKK
    I'm having a tough time trying to figure out the best way to handle this. I've created a few themes last year, released them under a GPL license, and pretty much forgot about them. My goal was to put them out publicly as samples of my work. I've recently come across a site and was shocked they are selling one of my themes among several other themes (not mine) and other support and package systems. Anyway needless to say I'm not happy about this. I did not intend for those themes to be sold, and if they are to be sold, at least I would expect a percentage of those sales. I contacted the website asking how many they sold and that I'm the author of one of the themes they were selling. I eventually received a reply that my theme is a GPL theme and that this license allows them to sell it without compensation to me. WTF? Just the way the reply was worded pissed me off. There is no way to comment on the site to inform possible buyers that those themes can be downloaded from my site. What can I do about this? I realize now it was a bad choice to release them under that license. Is it possible to take back the theme from public distribution or is it out forever. Can I change it from GPL to another license at this point? Will that be sufficient to stop the sale of my theme in the future? Any insights are appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Securing WinForms Application suggestions

    - by Sarah Fordington
    I've been looking for a simple key/license system for our users. Its partly to stop piracy (avoid users from sharing the application around) and the other half to track the number of 'licensed users' we have. I have already read a few good suggestions on SO but I'm curious as to how people have implemented the 30 day evaluation criteria. Do you generate a key that stores the date somewhere and do a comparison each time or is it a little more complicated - deleting the file/removing the registry shouldn't deactivate. Are there any example implementations out there that can give me a head start? The irony is that our PM doesn't want to license a third-party system to do it for us. This is for a Windows Forms application.

    Read the article

  • License similar to the MIT license but without the ability to sell?

    - by Ben
    I'm trying to decide how I want to license my Wordpress themes to the public. I know that the GPL is recommended to Wordpress theme creators, however I feel it might not be liberal enough for me because I want businesses to be able to use them if they want to. I really like the MIT license, the only thing that gets me is the freedom to sell part. I don't want someone taking my themes and selling them on some theme farm site, they should be free for everyone, however I don't want to require them to republish any changes under the MIT as well, I think that that freedom should remain intact. Is there a license that sort of fits into the terms I specified here? I'm not a lawyer so I have trouble reading through the complicated language of licenses. If there is not a similar license to the MIT but with the terms I have specified, should I just license under a modified MIT? If so, can anyone help me write it? Thanks very much!

    Read the article

  • Use of Icons from a GPL'd program

    - by clartaq
    There is a GPL'd program that has some nice icons I would like to use in a project of my own. I would like to release my project under a more liberal license like Apache or BSD. After reading the GPL V3 license (a few times), I can't figure out how it applies to resources like icons. Can I use them at all? If so, must I release my new project under GPL instead of some other license? Of course, I plan to contact the original author and ask them what they had in mind and honor that intent. But what are the legal requirements for use of graphical resources from GPL'd software?

    Read the article

  • Reselling Open Source Code licenced under GPL, MIT

    - by Tempe
    I want to use some open source code that is licenced under the following "GNU General Public License (GPL), MIT License". I want to include this code in a product that i will sell. Here is the code in particular What do i have to do to not get sued? :) I dont mind distributing the source code that i have modified, but i dont want the whole application open source. If i build the open source code into a library and open source the library can i link to it and not open the rest of my source?

    Read the article

  • MySQL dual license behavior

    - by jromero
    Hi SO, I'm running a commercial(closed source) Web App development for the first time. Initially I considered MySQL the most feasible option for a DB, until I get quite confused about its dual license behavior. If I want a commercial application do I still can use the GPL version of MySQL or I must get a license? The same question in a different way: If I use MySQL's GPL version does that force me to license the whole app under GPL? Either case I would go with PostgreSQL, I just want to make really really sure about this. Even in SO I've seen related("duplicates") questions but never a clear answer... All other tools I'm gonna use to code the project are licensed under BSD or MIT. Just in case, the role of MySQL in the project is merely as relational DB to store persistent data and query it. I'd really appreciate if someone can clarify this for me. Regards, thanks in advanced.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >