I don't know what it means if SFLC conflicts with FSF on this issue :) But just wanted to point out SFLC's legal theory that the GPL civicrm module could call the CiviCRM API, even though the civicrm API files themselves are AGPL.. --mark On 9/9/07, Gerhard Killesreiter <gerhard@killesreiter.de> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
mark burdett schrieb:
Here's the FAQ, by the Software Freedom Law Center, on why you can distribute CiviCRM (AGPL licensed, incompatible with GPL v2) as part of a GPL-licensed piece of software (e.g. drupal+civicrm distribution like civicspace was): http://civicrm.org/node/166
Quote:
Can I distribute CiviCRM as part of a GPL-licensed piece of software? How does that work?
Yes, so long as CiviCRM is a separate and independent program from the GPL-licensed software. You cannot combine code licensed under both licenses into a single program and then redistribute that combination because the AGPL and the current version of the GPL are incompatible.
The problem is that it is disputed that CiviCRM would be an independent programm when using civicrm.module to hook into Drupal.
Cheers, Gerhard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG5DcEfg6TFvELooQRAv7TAJ92fF3WCA/5YqF25957ittIkqbkngCgpN5D xU/RBTJCrnv2449B22NZvRE= =VsB+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----