GPLv3 => ASL, MIT, Mozilla, BSD license?

[otis.gos...@gmail.com]

Hello,

Just learned about Renjin.... and then notice it's GPLv3.  Is switching to something like ASL, MIT, Mozilla, or BSD license a possibility?

Thanks,
Otis

[Bertram, Alexander]

Hi Otis,

Though I would love to license Renjin more liberally, we depend signficantly on the GPL-Licensed R-language base, stats, etc libraries from GNU R, so Renjin is even in the most creative of interpretations a derivative work of GNU R which confers certain obligations under the GPL.

However, we're committed to doing what ever we can to making it available in the widest range of use cases, for example, perhaps relicensing parts of it under LGPL, which I think would be consistent with the spirit of the GNU R licensing.

Can you tell me more about your use case and what problems that GPL would pose for you?

Best,

Alex

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Renjin Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to renjin-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[aakash...@gmail.com]

In my case usage of GPLv3 is prohibitive because of the ambiguity (perceived or otherwise) around whether our users would have the right to download proprietary source code given the "linking" to GPLv3 code (Renjin code). IANAL - but, based on what I can tell, anything that is "linked" against an GPLv3 library must also be GPLed. 

[Bertram, Alexander]

I think the issue is more nuanced than the mechanics of class-file linking. Although I'm not a lawyer, my understanding is that it comes down to the extent you can make the argument that your software and Renjin remain two substantively different, independent works.

First, I hasten to remark that the GPL doesn't have to confer any obligations on your *users*: they can download your product and Renjin and do whatever they like with it; They have no obligations as GPL licensees unless they want to distribute Renjin outside their organization.

As far as your own obligations go, I fear that the answer is "it depends" :

From the GNU FAQ:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?
"[...] in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and non-free programs communicate at arms length, that they are not combined in a way that would make them effectively a single program.

If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two separate programs—but you have to do it properly. The issue is simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing."

My read of that is that the spirit of the integration is key. If someone used Renjin as the basis for a proprietary, general purpose data analysis package I'd be pretty annoyed, regardless of how the programs communicate.

If you've got a specialized commercial package for fisheries analysis or high frequency trading or whatever and you want to offer integration with Renjin as as separate add-on so your users can interact with your software using the R language, I presume you could make the argument that your product is a separate work.

One example of this is icCube, a commercial BI server that offers integration with Renjin as a separate download. 

http://www.iccube.com/support/documentation/mdx_integration/r_integration.html

If you're looking to be very cautious, you could restrict yourself to using the javax.script API or offer a separate download. 

If you find a good lawyer (someone has to be a lawyer, right?) to confirm/contradict my reasoned opinion, please let me know!

Best,

Alex

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.