Preamble
- If I say “BSD” I mean the 3-Clause BSD license
- If I say “GPL” I mean the GPLv3 license
- I am not the author of the GPL project
- I am the author of the BSD project
Simple Task
I want to use a 3rd party software (GPL) in (or better ‘with’) my open source project (BSD).
Situation
- I won’t change any of the GPL project code (using it AS IS).
- I want to use it as kind of a library (I know about LGPL but it’s not available).
- I will use the GPL software as bulk, not only parts of the code.
- I will indicate the use of the GPL project with the license, homepage and where and why it is used in my BSD project (in README file).
- I will not take the credits for the functionality of the GPL project.
- I will take the credits for my project and the “Adapter” connecting my BSD project to the GPL project.
- I don’t want to re-license the GPL project as BSD
- I won’t charge any fees or something like that.
To gain insight, you can find the BSD project at
GitHub: MOC-Framework (see /Extension/FlowPlayer and /Module/Office/Video)
and the GPL project here:
Flowplayer (free flash-version)
Simple Question
Is this possible?
Closing Words
I found some discussions, stating “it is possible”, others say “no”. Most of the “no” were for commercial projects. Most of the “yes” are referring to: “include BSD in GPLv3”, but that’s not what I mean. I want GPLv3 along with BSD.
I simply can’t figure it out.
4
Disclaimer: I’m just a software developer sharing personal opinions and not your lawyer.
Well, I don’t know where your problem is, however next to keeping your code under BSD you could also dual-license it under GPL which will help you to keep headaches out on your end if licensing causes you some and you don’t want to consult a lawyer on your behalf.
That done you can keep all your code under BSD (next to having it GPL) to also full-fill requirements to distribute GPL’ed parts with it. You can do that by making clear to users who contribute code that they contribute it under both licenses.
That done its clearly your users choice. All you need to do when accepting patches is to take care that the BSD of your library code is preserved.
This would be similarly the situation when the GPL component would not be part of your library and a user would integrate GPL components with it. Because of the BSD, nobody is hindered doing that.
Users who don’t want to have a GPL’ed package can just remove any GPL’ed parts and only use the parts under BSD. Just make clear with your dual licensing model is not conjunctive (GPL and BSD) but disjunctive (GPL or BSD) for the files you keep under dual licensing.
This would also help you with the problem offering a software package on Github containing GPL’ed software not under the GPL – which is what I see you right now doing with the Github hosting platform (it has automatic packaging).
10
Yes, it’s possible to link your BSD project and the GPL project. However, it means you must release the combined version as GPL.
Skim over FSF’s GPL compatible licenses and you’ll see a range of commentary about how well a particular license can fold into the GPL. And yes, by compatible, what FSF really means is how easily can you combine two works and release the resultant work as a GPL’d work. It’s obviously a bit self-serving, but at least you can better understand the ramifications to your project when you combine it with a GPL’d project.
10
Yes, it is possible with the following implications:
- The combined binary is covered by GPL. Only applies if they are statically or dynamically linked together. If your binary just runs the GPL one, it isn’t covered. Distribution method does not matter.
- You still may distribute your sources under the more permissive BSD license.
- A program is not a derived work of a plugin, so if you have a program, that can, optionally, load a plugin and only the plugin uses the GPL code, the main program is not covered by GPL, only the glue that adapts the GPL code to work as plugin is.
2