Open source licensing model(s)

AFAIK, the usual opinion is that you need to do everything under GPL that is statically linked to GPLed code (e.g. the Kernel). In embedded projects this is relevant for drives you do for your propriety hardware. You can do all your user land programs with your own license if you want to.

You need to grant your customers access to the source code of the GPLed part of the software, as delivering a box is considered as distributing the software contained.

Weather you "sell" something or "give it away" is not relevant. Both is "distributing".

-Michael

Hello All,

Prehaps there is someone who can shed some light on this...I am not familiar with the open source licensing models.

What happens when purpose-specific software is developed on an opensource platform. Does anything change when such is supplied as a complete system, for instance as a wireless access point or similar device?

Thanks in advance for your comments,

Nicolas Noakes

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote: : Hello All,

: Prehaps there is someone who can shed some light on this...I am not : familiar with the open source licensing models.

: What happens when purpose-specific software is developed on an : opensource platform. Does anything change when such is supplied as a : complete system, for instance as a wireless access point or similar : device?

You'd be better of googling and going to authoritative sites than aksing here, Try going to

If your app. does not involve any GPL software, then the fact that it runs on Linux is neither here nor there - you can release your software under any terms you want. System calls to the kernel are not linking, and libc and ulibc are, I believe, LGPL'd