[development] Modules that integrate non-GPL PHP apps violate the GPL.

[David Strauss]

Thomas Barregren wrote:
>> To avoid this sort of GPL Hell, we have very specific terms on which we
>> work with clients:
>>
>> (1) The client owns the work we do specifically for them.
>>
>> (2) The client licenses .module files and their dependencies back to us
>> under the GPL, version 2, and all future versions as published by the
>> FSF.
>>
>> The terms of (2) mean their internal staff can contribute to the
>> project, but the final working modules are licensed back to us in a
>> GPL-clean way that allows us to return the work to the community.
> 
> The other way around works as well. You can keep the intellectual
> property rights yourself and license the software under GPL to your
> customer.

Doing it that way requires that the client transfer ownership of even
their own employees' work on the project back to us. That's a lot harder
to convince a client to do considering that they're paying you to do the
work.

If we desired the ability to relicense work, we would probably still use
the scheme I mentioned but with a BSD (or similar) license.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20070831/8b4dbfbe/attachment-0001.pgp