Qt-interest Archive, December 2006
[Licencing] calling a non-free program from a Qt application using system() ?
Message 1 in thread
I'm working on an application to transfer OpenStreetMap
(openstreetmap.org) mapping data to a Garmin GPS satnav device. The
application would call two non-free (closed-source but zero cost)
applications: cgpsmapper and sendmap, to actually send data to the GPS
satnav device.
My question is: if these were called via system(), as opposed to being
linked into my application, would it still be OK to use the Free edition
of Qt and licence my application under the GPL?
Thanks,
Nick
--
[ signature omitted ]
Message 2 in thread
On 12/18/06, Nick Whitelegg <Nick.Whitelegg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm working on an application to transfer OpenStreetMap
> (openstreetmap.org) mapping data to a Garmin GPS satnav device. The
> application would call two non-free (closed-source but zero cost)
> applications: cgpsmapper and sendmap, to actually send data to the GPS
> satnav device.
>
> My question is: if these were called via system(), as opposed to being
> linked into my application, would it still be OK to use the Free edition
> of Qt and licence my application under the GPL?
The types of interfaces GPL get infected through (aka "derived
software) is a grey water and not precisely defined. Some claim that
even application connected via network sockets can be though as
"derived software" in some cases. However I suggest you to not dive
into dangerous ground of lawyering, just assume it's ok, until someone
proofs it don't.
I personally think that if you software doesn't ultimately depends on
this proprietary software and can work with other implementation and
data sources, you can't call it "derived software" and GPL shouldn't
bother you here.
--
[ signature omitted ]
Message 3 in thread
"Nick Whitelegg" <Nick.Whitelegg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OFFF3A1D7C.38CF3A0B-ON80257248.0034E292-80257248.00351BC3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I'm working on an application to transfer OpenStreetMap
> (openstreetmap.org) mapping data to a Garmin GPS satnav device. The
> application would call two non-free (closed-source but zero cost)
> applications: cgpsmapper and sendmap, to actually send data to the GPS
> satnav device.
>
> My question is: if these were called via system(), as opposed to being
> linked into my application, would it still be OK to use the Free edition
> of Qt and licence my application under the GPL?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
It might be more against the spirit ("your software is useless without
closed-source applications") than against the language of the GPL, but
probably it's ok. If you for instance document the interface, and thus
allow for the development of applications that can replace "cgpsmapper"
and "sendmap" with FOSS then you should be on the safe side.
However, I suggest to talk to the FSF to get an authoritive response to
this (and any similar) question.
Volker
--
[ signature omitted ]
Message 4 in thread
Volker Hilsheimer wrote:
> It might be more against the spirit ("your software is useless without
> closed-source applications") than against the language of the GPL, but
> probably it's ok. If you for instance document the interface, and thus
> allow for the development of applications that can replace "cgpsmapper"
> and "sendmap" with FOSS then you should be on the safe side.
[I think so, too]
> However, I suggest to talk to the FSF to get an authoritive response to
> this (and any similar) question.
I wonder whether anybody ever received an answer to such a question from
FSF. I tried already twice and got not even some kind of hint that
anybody ever read the mail, let alone an aswer to the questions...
Andre'
--
[ signature omitted ]
Message 5 in thread
Hi,
> I wonder whether anybody ever received an answer to such a question from
> FSF. I tried already twice and got not even some kind of hint that
> anybody ever read the mail, let alone an aswer to the questions...
To tell the truth, I don't see why they would reply to requests
concerning software not copyrighted by FSF.
Indeed how can they reply on behalf of other organizations? It's up to
the organizations that have the copyright of the code to defend their
rights, by explaining (or not) their licensing scheme. In the end, as
always, users are supposed to rely on legal counsel to get answers...
--
[ signature omitted ]
Message 6 in thread
Volker Hilsheimer wrote:
>> It might be more against the spirit ("your software is useless without
>> closed-source applications") than against the language of the GPL, but
>> probably it's ok. If you for instance document the interface, and thus
>> allow for the development of applications that can replace "cgpsmapper"
>> and "sendmap" with FOSS then you should be on the safe side.
>[I think so, too]
>> However, I suggest to talk to the FSF to get an authoritive response to
>> this (and any similar) question.
>I wonder whether anybody ever received an answer to such a question from
>FSF. I tried already twice and got not even some kind of hint that
>anybody ever read the mail, let alone an aswer to the questions...
Thanks for the answers. As it happens it looks like someone might be
developing a FOSS solution to this ("QLandkarte")...
Nick
--
[ signature omitted ]
