Comments on: Black Duck Software http://www.adventuresinoss.com/?p=1234 The Mouth of OpenNMS Thu, 02 Sep 2010 19:49:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: JackH http://www.adventuresinoss.com/?p=1234&cpage=1#comment-1690 JackH Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:34:08 +0000 http://www.adventuresinoss.com/?p=1234#comment-1690 Presumably with tools like RRDTool that are being "merely aggregated" then there is no problem using them in a commercial, closed product. GPL libraries are a completely different matter though... would kinda suggest that the "enterprise" version of Zenoss should be GPL too? There's no problem charging for GPL code, you've just got to make sure you make the source available and then wait for somebody to make said code freely available. Hasn't done Red Hat any harm? I appreciate I'm not a lawyer, but... I was of the impression that mixing GPL + proprietary code infects the proprietary code so that it too becomes GPL? The anti-fork provisions look pretty bogus too, though Zenoss have the lawyers somebody doing the forking probably doesn't. Presumably with tools like RRDTool that are being “merely aggregated” then there is no problem using them in a commercial, closed product. GPL libraries are a completely different matter though… would kinda suggest that the “enterprise” version of Zenoss should be GPL too? There’s no problem charging for GPL code, you’ve just got to make sure you make the source available and then wait for somebody to make said code freely available. Hasn’t done Red Hat any harm?

I appreciate I’m not a lawyer, but… I was of the impression that mixing GPL + proprietary code infects the proprietary code so that it too becomes GPL?

The anti-fork provisions look pretty bogus too, though Zenoss have the lawyers somebody doing the forking probably doesn’t.

]]> By: neolex http://www.adventuresinoss.com/?p=1234&cpage=1#comment-1689 neolex Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:04:27 +0000 http://www.adventuresinoss.com/?p=1234#comment-1689 We are currently auditing the licensing of Zenoss' codebase, and it looks rather messy (although the legal review is not 100% done). It's not just GPL compliance that is the problem, but the code includes various components under conflicting licenses as well as code that is prohibited from being used for commercial purposes. We are currently auditing the licensing of Zenoss’ codebase, and it looks rather messy (although the legal review is not 100% done). It’s not just GPL compliance that is the problem, but the code includes various components under conflicting licenses as well as code that is prohibited from being used for commercial purposes.

]]>