similar to: R-base licensing question

I know the standard answer to this kind of question is "get legal advice from a lawyer", but I would like to hear the (hopefully informed) opinion of other people. I would say that, according to the FSF's interpretation of the GPL, any R code using GPL packages can be distributed legally only using GPL-compatible licenses. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL

We spent a little time here taking a look at the Vorbis licensing scheme and ran into some possible issues. In particular, the Vorbis FAQ page here says that the LGPL license applies to Vorbis libraries and GPL applies to source code (at least that's what I gather). http://www.vorbis.com/faq.html#flic http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/lesser.html Reading the text of these Gnu

Howdy all... Reading with interest the thread(s) about REvolution, package licensing and the requirements of the GPL. First of all, let me introduce myself?. ?I joined REvolution Computing in February, after working for nearly 4 years for Intel as an open source strategist and before that for 6 years at Sun, where I established the first corporate open source programs office. ?I'm a Member of

I intend to submit a newly developed package to CRAN (to be licensed under the GPL), which prompted me to re-read the GPL FAQ. The following section caught my attention: > If a programming language interpreter is released under the GPL, does that mean programs written to be interpreted by it must be under GPL-compatible licenses? > > When the interpreter just interprets a language,

Malcolm Scott <newsgroups1_m@lcolm.NOSPAM.org.uk> writes: > Sorry! I had assumed that, because it was free and for Linux, that it > was GPL :-( I'll be more careful in the future... Actually, most ostensibly "Linux" distributions contain *large* amounts of software that is under various licenses other than the GPL. University licenses especially, and particularly the

> ok, > This is something I want to ask for some time now :) > Does this mean that License issues works with wine as it > works with the Linux kernel? > The Linux kernel is GPLed, however if a module (driver) is > dynamic loadable, it can have a proprietary license. > Is this the way it works with wine? The core (wine itself) > is LGPL, however its modules (builtin

Dear All, I've been following this mailing list for over three years now, but its just now that I have realized that R is licensed under GPL! :-) I'm not a lawyer and I don't want lawyer advice, but I'd like to get your feedback on a license question. My goal is to develop commercial software for image analysis of biomedical samples that may be used i.e. in academic institutions.

Hi, I haven't seen this mentioned here before. http://www.plusv.org/ "With traditional MP3, a typical Near CD Quality audio file has been encoded with a data rate of 128 kbits/s. While this is ok for people with big hard disks and fast Internet connections, this data speed has clearly been a bottleneck for people using modems or storing their music into 32 or 64 MB portable player

Hoping someone can clear up a licencing question... My understanding is that R is licensed under the GPL, with some headers licensed under the LGPL (per COPYRIGHTS, so that R plugins don't have to be GPL - arguably incorrect, but besides the point). JRI states that it is licensed under the LGPL - but it links against R shared libraries (or so is my understanding - please correct me if I'm

Hello, Razvan > after that I use only the Windows interface to it (like any other > proprietary Windows software does) , GPL forbids me to do that. That's due to nature of the interface. Binary interface to codec make the proprietary application 'derived work'. > - I didn't find any commercial projects (not Operating Systems or > dual-licensed but simple

Hey guys, I have a question about CrossOver and the LGPL license. I'm looking into licensing some software of my own and I'm not sure if I can. >From what I've read the LGPL license doesn't allow any product to be sold if it's based on LGPL protected software, unless it uses the software simply as a plug-in: > A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the

On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 08:39 -0500, asterisk-users-request at lists.digium.com wrote: > Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 12:02:53 -0600 > From: Stephen Bosch <posting at vodacomm.ca> > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office. > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com> > Message-ID:

Yes, you are right. During my testings, I tried the llvm produced .S files with the gcc frontend and it compiled and linked them to the final executable. The problem is with the gcc and binutils licence. This is GPL and while this is ok for open source or for academic purposes, it can't be used on commercial projects. In fact one of the strong points of llvm (and clang) is its BSD like

Just FYI, MySQL stuff has been pulled from Asterisk since apparently now the client libraries are under GPL and not LGPL (and thus are incompatible with OpenH323). You may check out the MySQL code under "asterisk-addons", but you should not use both MySQL and OpenH323 (OpenSSL is also questionable) in the same Asterisk installation unless you downgrade your MySQL client libraries to a

Hello, I plan to create a commercial software that would automate the running of a few IT security tools and build a nice report, in order to help security auditors in their work. I saw your smbclient tool that could be really appropriate. As this tool is GPL'd, I would like to make sure you agree with the usage (running and parsing) I plan. Of course, should you have any requirement (e.g.

> There's also then entire GNU toolchain, through MinGW and/or Cygwin. Which works perfectly right now without any extra tweaking :) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Begin forwarded message: > From: Serge Noiraud <Serge.Noiraud at free.fr> > Date: 27 January 2008 21:17:28 GMT > To: steve at asklater.com > Subject: Mapstraction mailing list and licensing. > > Hi, > Reading the mapstraction home page, You speek about mapstraction > mailing list. > All the pointers go on the openstreetmap mailing lists and I saw the >

I plan to highlight the differences between RHEL and CentOS 3.1. Making this information clearly available without the need for duplicated effort across the world. This will help others take CentOS in different directions benefiting us all. It will help individuals create new projects more easily and efficiently. Are the diff files readily available, can I download them from anywhere? If the

Hi there. First of all, I'd like to congratulate to developers for making a free specification and LGPLed decoder/encoder. :-). I did some test, ripping 17 tracks of my CD and converting them to both MP3 and OGG format. MP3 encoder/player was Lame 3.70 OGG encoder/player was from a Saturday nightly tgz package. ------------------------------------ MP3: LAME-3.70 mpg123-0.59r-4 MP3: lame -S

I''m trolling for example RSpec code. Any pointers appreciated. Cheers, Obie