[development] Modules that integrate non-GPL PHP apps violate the GPL.
gerhard at killesreiter.de
Fri Aug 31 23:35:05 UTC 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Laura Scott schrieb:
> On Aug 31, 2007, at 4:48 PM, 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
>>> 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
> Does it? That's the real bone of contention in this thread, at least for
> me and I suspect not a few others. I guess that whether licensing the
> result of consulting/development work that is *not* work-for-hire
> constitutes "distribution."
How can consulting/development work not be work for hire?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the development