none
Licensing Code using the MSF and gurobi plugin under GPLv3

    Question

  • This is a cross post from http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/133294

    I have written a piece of SW using the MSF and the gurobi plugin.

    I hav no commercial interest in the work (and I only have the academic licenses for both components used) so I intend to publish it under GPLv3 or something similar if possible.

    The problem is, the GPLv3 states in section 1:

    > The "System Libraries" of an executable work include anything, other
    > than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of
    > packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major
    > Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that
    > Major Component, or to implement a Standard Interface for which an
    > implementation is available to the public in source code form.  A
    > "Major Component", in this context, means a major essential component
    > (kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
    > (if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to
    > produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.

    The way I see it, the Solver Foundation does not fall into this definition, making it incompatible with the GPLv3 (which is not a surprise by itself).

    Now, I do not want to distribute any form of the MSF or the Gurobi plugin and I will not provide any binaries for the software, so I am unsure whether thew MSF not being a system library does affect my licensing options at all (first time I have to choose a license myself for anything).

    The idea is to have something similar to the Readme.txt in the gurobi plugin samples which just tells users how to include the actual plugin when acquired.

    Also, the MSF would only be noticed in the VS2010 Solution file, not actually linked (since no binary would be distributed).

    So, is this possible with the MSF EULA and the GPL?

    Saturday, February 04, 2012 2:39 PM

All replies

  • I am not a lawyer - but this would seem to be more of a question about the GPL than the MSF EULA...and I am not familiar enough with it to say anything productive.

    Nate

    Sunday, February 12, 2012 6:03 PM