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

Earnie Boyd earnie at users.sourceforge.net
Fri Aug 31 21:58:00 UTC 2007

Quoting Thomas Barregren <thomas at webbredaktoren.se>:

> Could you please explain this "legal difference".

LGPL libraries allows for use of the binary version of that library by 
other binaries without infecting the using binary with the GPL while 
GPL libraries (static or dynamic linked) force the GPL on the binaries 
using the library.  There is no difference for distribution of the LGPL 
binary or source.  Note, the libstdc++ library adds other statements of 
use so that you can include its header files in your proprietary source 
with infecting that source or binary with the GPL.

I find it amusing that a discussion of "non-GPL *PHP* apps" is ensuing 
because PHP itself isn't L/GPL.  I would almost label this thread as an 
example of oxymoron.  But, however, my use of the Drupal API (a CMS 
library covered by a version of the GPL license) requires that my 
source also be GPL.  If my code can be used without the Drupal library 
then that requirement doesn't fit and I am free to license as I please. 
  If my source requires another library that isn't GPL but still 
requires Drupal (a GPL licensed library) then I am still forced to 
cover my source with GPL.  My use of the non-GPL licensed library does 
not force Drupal to the license of the other library.  My use of the 
non-GPL licensed library along with Drupal doesn't force my code to be 
covered by the other library either unless it is ``copyleft'' as well 
in which case I'm screwed.

All-in-all, I can use Drupal along with all of the other programs I 
use.  Drupal CVS can store contributed modules even if it includes 
non-GPL modules without affecting Drupal since the contribution isn't 
required to execute Drupal.  No one can force me to not use GPL 
alongside non-GPL or force me to not use GPL on Windows or any other 
proprietary system.


More information about the development mailing list