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

[Gerhard Killesreiter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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
>>> 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.
> 
> 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?

Cheers,
	Gerhard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG2KWpfg6TFvELooQRAuAIAKDERj5sflTc7W4xn6BH0wflmQxDswCfai+3
3N0vI35aZpYaG2uKrElVdBc=
=lt20
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----