我可以合法将GPL软件合并到专有的闭源Web应用程序中吗？ [英] Can I legally incorporate GPL software in a proprietary, closed-source Web app?

问题描述

我正在开发一个基于Web的C源代码，它使用gcc编译器编译服务器上的代码。您可以将其视为像Google Doc这样的编写C源代码的东西，并可以在单独的窗口中看到控制台输出。我想为我的网站使用每月订阅模式，用户每月支付使用该软件的费用。 因为gcc是根据GPL授权的，我是否需要为我的网站开源代码？需要注意的一点是，我使用gcc编译器的唯一方法是通过服务器上的一些make文件。它是否包含GPL条款中的链接？我认为我的情况就像流行网站www.github.com，您可以在这里创建私人git（GPL）回购支付月度订阅。感谢您的回答。

解决方案

您的编译代码不是来自gcc代码的派生它使用外部编译的可执行文件。事实上，你不需要看到或使用gcc代码本身。因此，我认为你可以在不违反条款的情况下使用它。使用gcc编译甚至没有连接，仅仅是程序的外部使用。

引用通用公共许可证，通过 Lawrence Rosen 在 @Shoban 中提到的答案：

<派生作品>在
版权法案17 USC 101中定义为：

基于一个或多个
先前存在的作品，如
翻译，音乐编排，
戏剧化，虚构化，
电影版，声音
录音，艺术复制，
缩略图，缩合或任何其他
形式，其中可以重新制作一个作品，
转换或改编一个作品
包括编辑修订，
注释，详细说明， Ø其他
修改，整体而言，
代表
作者身份的原创作品，是一项派生工作。

简单地将受版权保护的作品与其他作品相结合不会产生衍生作品。原作版权作品必须以某种方式进行修改。由此产生的衍生品
作品本身必须代表作者原创作品的
原作品。因此，如果
被许可人不修改
原始GPL许可程序，但
仅仅运行它，他不会创建
的衍生工作。

使用gcc编译的代码遵循GPL，与使用MS Word编写的文档成为Microsoft的知识产权相同。

无论如何，如果您认真对待本网站，您可以直接联系gcc团队，咨询律师或进一步在网上阅读有关此主题。

编辑：

似乎GPL传染病的强烈争议是关于动态链接;也就是说，是否动态链接到GPL许可组件会强制您将GPL应用于您的代码。这种链接的法律地位似乎还不清楚，因此您可能不希望允许用户在您的网站上执行此操作。

您可能想避免将gcc组件动态链接到您的服务器端代码;使用它们作为一个完全独立的过程是安全的。

编辑：

我们正在处理律师和版权法，所以我认为问问劳伦斯罗森如果引用他没有信任我对合理使用的看法。他很快回复我的电子邮件，并允许它！

$ b

链接：

• GPL如何应用你正在使用GPL下发布的工具，而不是整合GPL代码？，
php？t = 397871rel =nofollow noreferrer> Ubuntu论坛中的讨论

I am developing a close source Web-based C IDE which uses gcc compiler for compiling the code on the server. You can think of it as something like Google Doc where you write C source and can see the console output in a separate window. I want to use a monthly subscription model for my website, where users pay a monthly fee to use the software. Since gcc is licensed under GPL, do I need to open source the source code for my website? One point to note is that the only way I use the gcc compiler is through some make file on server. Does it entail to linking in GPL terms? I think my situation is like the popular websites www.github.com, where you can create private git(GPL) repo paying a monthly subscription. Thanks for your answer.

解决方案

Your compiled code is not derived from the gcc code; It uses its compiled executables externally. In fact, you don't need to ever see or use the gcc code itself. Therefore, I think you can use it without violating the terms; Compiling using gcc is not even linking, merely external usage of the program.

Quoting General Public License, Explained by Lawrence Rosen mentioned at @Shoban's answer:

A "derivative work" is defined in the Copyright Act, 17 USC 101, as a:

"work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'."

Simply combining a copyrighted work with another work does not create a derivative work. The original copyrighted work must be modified in some way. The resulting derivative work must itself "represent an original work of authorship." So if the licensee does not modify the original GPL-licensed program, but merely runs it, he is not creating a derivative work.

Making code compiled using gcc subject to GPL would make the same sense as making a document written using MS Word an intellectual property of Microsoft.

Anyway, If you're serious about this site, you can either contact the gcc team directly, consult a lawyer or further read about this subject on the web.

EDIT:

It seems that the strong dispute on GPL contagiosity is about dynamic linking; That is, whether dynamically linking to a GPL-licensed component enforces you to apply GPL to your code. It seems that the legal status of that such linking is unclear, so you might not want to allow your users to do that on your site.

You might want to refrain from dynamically linking gcc components to your server-side code; Use them as a totally separate process to be in the safe side.

EDIT:

We're dealing with lawyers and copyright laws, so I figured it would be better to ask Lawrence Rosen If quoting him was OK without trusting my ideas about Fair Use. He quickly responded to my email and allowed it! How cool.

Links:

• How does the GPL apply if you are using a tool released under the GPL rather than integrating GPL code?, Stackoverflow.com question
• A discussion in the Ubuntu Forums

这篇关于我可以合法将GPL软件合并到专有的闭源Web应用程序中吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！