[Qgis-psc] Questions about QGIS API licensing for a company internal use only

[Rafael Abrantes Machado]

Thank you all for replying.

Since we don't know the details of the conflicting license it's hard to
> make an appropriate statement.


We have not defined any license for our internal software.


> Conflicts can arise also internally; e.g. if an internal user asks for the
> source code of the application which he is allowed to receive under the
> terms of GPLv2.


That is one of our questions. Can internal users really ask for the source
code?

Quoting from GNU's GPLv2 Faq:


> *Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company
> “distribution”?
> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution>*No,
> in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a
> consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version
> and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the
> staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders.
> However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or
> individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to
> contractors for use off-site is distribution.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#UnreleasedMods

Originally we thought they could. But then reading gnu's faq again we
changed our mind and it seems that if we install the application for our
internal users, then it is not distribution and GPL v2 doesn't apply.

Regards





Em qui., 9 de dez. de 2021 às 08:27, Matthias Kuhn <matthias at opengis.ch>
escreveu:

> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 12:13 PM Jürgen E. Fischer <jef at norbit.de> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09. Dec 2021 at 09:40:24 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote:
>> > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 06:25, Rafael Abrantes Machado <
>> rafael.a.machado at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > I would like to make sure if we could use QGIS C++ API in our
>> software,
>> > > which is not (and cannot be) GPLv2, but it is for internal use only
>> (will
>> > > never be distributed).
>>
>> > > I read a lot about licensing and it seems to me that this would be an
>> > > acceptable scenario but I thought it would be better to check with a
>> formal
>> > > QGIS channel.
>>
>> > No, this is NOT a legal use of the QGIS libraries. Regardless of how
>> you use
>> > or distribute your software it must still use a GPLv2 or later
>> compatible
>> > licence.
>>
>> Why?  A license defines what the receiver of a work is allowed to do with
>> it.
>> If a work is not given away, there's no need for a license.
>>
>> The GPL doesn't restrict use, but redistribution and that apparently not
>> taking
>> place in this case.
>>
>> I don't see why using the API should be different from any other use of
>> QGIS.
>>
>>
> Since we don't know the details of the conflicting license it's hard to
> make an appropriate statement.
>
> Conflicts can arise also internally; e.g. if an internal user asks for the
> source code of the application which he is allowed to receive under the
> terms of GPLv2.
>
> IANAL
> Matthias
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20211209/83d02f8b/attachment.html>