Dears,
Wikipedia classifies the European Union Public Licence (EUPL) as GPL compatible.
This seems indeed resulting from the text (article 5 and annexe).
However external links refer to a memo "On the EUPL" <http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/2005-July/005055.html
by Georg C. F. Greve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_C._F._Greve
of the Free Software Foundation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation , stating:
"The last version of the EUPL we were presented with was a copyleft, GPL incompatible Free Software license."
Could you please clarify and update?
Thank you!
Patrice-E. Schmitz | Director EU Management Consulting
Unisys Belgium nv/sa | Bourgetlaan 20 - Avenue du Bourget B-1130 Brussels | Phone 32 2 728 06 31 | Fax 32 2 728 04 09 | Mobile 32 478 50 40 65 | www.unisys.com
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers.
On 22/02/2008, Schmitz, Patrice-Emmanuel patrice-emmanuel.schmitz@be.unisys.com wrote:
Wikipedia classifies the European Union Public Licence (EUPL) as GPL compatible. This seems indeed resulting from the text (article 5 and annexe). However external links refer to a memo "On the EUPL" by Georg C. F. Greve of the Free Software Foundation, stating: "The last version of the EUPL we were presented with was a copyleft, GPL incompatible Free Software license." Could you please clarify and update?
Interesting it's not listed on http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/ - which is the usual place people would go to check if a given licence is GPL-compatible.
- d.
"David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com writes:
Interesting it's not listed on http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/
- which is the usual place people would go to check if a given licence
is GPL-compatible.
FSF's list isn't intended to be complete.
I don't know FSF's reasons for choosing the licences they have, but I think that OSI's approach (where contributors to licence proliferation are rewarded with free advertising) proved that completeness has drawbacks.
On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 13:13 +0000, Schmitz, Patrice-Emmanuel wrote:
Dears,
Wikipedia classifies the European Union Public Licence (EUPL) as GPL compatible.
This seems indeed resulting from the text (article 5 and annexe).
Article 5 seem to clearly* state that you can redistribute the work under the GPL version 2, if you need to link an EUPL 1.0 work with a GPL 2.0 work. Therefore the GPL is satisfied, as you will just use that one license to redistribute the work as a whole.
Note that it is unclear if EUPL can be considered compatible with version 3 of the GPL.
Perhaps the EU needs to release an amendment to their license to include it.
However external links refer to a memo "On the EUPL" by Georg C. F. Greve of the Free Software Foundation, stating:
Just to be precise, that's Free Software Foundation *Europe*, which is not the same entity as the FSF who wrtie and maintain the GPL licenses.
"The last version of the EUPL we were presented with was a copyleft, GPL incompatible Free Software license."
This comment ("On the EUPL") was released in 2005, the EUPL 1.0 has been released in 2007, I guess many things have changed in 2 years.
Simo.
*IANAL
Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information.
On Feb 22, 2008, at 2:13 PM, Schmitz, Patrice-Emmanuel wrote:
Dears,
Wikipedia classifies the European Union Public Licence (EUPL) as GPL compatible.
This seems indeed resulting from the text (article 5 and annexe).
However external links refer to a memo "On the EUPL" by Georg C. F. Greve of the Free Software Foundation, stating:
"The last version of the EUPL we were presented with was a copyleft,GPL incompatible Free Software license." Could you please clarify and update? Thank you!
Patrice-E. Schmitz | Director EU Management Consulting
Unisys Belgium nv/sa | Bourgetlaan 20 - Avenue du Bourget B-1130 Brussels | Phone 32 2 728 06 31 | Fax 32 2 728 04 09 | Mobile 32 478 50 40 65 | www.unisys.com
<image001.gif>
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers.
<image001.gif> _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
