目錄表

譯自”GNU計畫GNU授權條款常見問答集“。翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證,且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意,原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本,故本頁面之相關資訊僅供線上參考而不採用公眾授權的方式提供重製與散布

如果您對於這個分頁內容有任何的資訊分享或是改進建議,歡迎寄信到lucien.cc@gmail.com留言指教。

關於GNU計畫、自由軟體基金會,以及授權政策的基本問答(Basic questions about the GNU Project, the Free Software Foundation, and its licenses)

「GPL」這個詞彙代表什麼意思?

What does “GPL” stand for?

稱為自由軟體者,是不是代表此軟體一定是用GPL對外釋出?

Does free software mean using the GPL?

為什麼我要選擇GPL來釋出我的自由軟體,而不是選用其他的自由軟體授權條款?

Why should I use the GNU GPL rather than other free software licenses?

所有GNU計畫對外釋出的軟體,都是採用GPL來進行授權的嗎?

Does all GNU software use the GNU GPL as its license?

將個別程式以GNU GPL的方式對外授權釋出,就會自動讓這個程式被列為GNU計畫所管理的套件程式嗎?

Does using the GPL for a program make it GNU software?

除了軟體之外、我還能將GPL條款適用於其他類別的客體上嗎?

Can I use the GPL for something other than software?

為什麼GNU計畫不建議將GPL適用在技術手冊的釋出上?

Why don't you use the GPL for manuals?

GPL授權條款有其他語言的翻譯版本嗎?

Are there translations of the GPL into other languages?

為何GNU計畫部份函式庫是以GPL授權,而不是全部以LGPL釋出?

Why are some GNU libraries released under the ordinary GPL rather than the Lesser GPL?

誰有權利去處理GPL程式的不當利用或侵權問題?

Who has the power to enforce the GPL?

為何自由軟體基金會要求其轄下專案的貢獻者,上傳程式碼時需同步將權利讓渡予自由軟體基金會?若是我營運同類的GPL授權專案,也應該採用這樣的程式碼歸屬政策嗎?若要採行、應該如何去做?

Why does the FSF require that contributors to FSF-copyrighted programs assign copyright to the FSF? If I hold copyright on a GPL'ed program, should I do this, too? If so, how?

我可以修改GPL授權條款,以衍生一個新的軟體授權條款嗎?

Can I modify the GPL and make a modified license?

為何自由軟體基金會要釋出AGPL3為另一個獨立的GPL類別條款?

Why did you decide to write the GNU Affero GPLv3 as a separate license?

對於GPL授權條款的基本了解(General understanding of the GNU licenses)

為何GPL程式容許使用者可以發布自己的衍生版本?

Why does the GPL permit users to publish their modified versions?

GPL是否要求以其授權的衍生程式,都需要向公眾公開程式源碼?

Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?

我可以將GPL程式與其他不相關的非自由軟體,一起灌在同一台電腦上使用嗎?

如果我知道某人手上持有GPL授權的程式,可以直接要求他重製一份給我使用嗎?

If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy?

GPL授權條款裡「對任何第三方皆有效的書面文件」這句話怎麼解釋?這句話是表示任何人都可以取得GPL授權軟體的程式源碼,而不用管散布者與被散布者之間的關係嗎?

What does “written offer valid for any third party” mean in GPLv2? Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter what?

GPL2表示,GPL程式的衍生作品被散布釋出時,都必須要以GPL2的授權方式授權給當事人以外的「所有第三人」,此處「所有第三人」的指涉標的究竟為何?

The GPL says that modified versions, if released, must be “licensed … to all third parties.” Who are these third parties?

我可以販售GPL程式來獲取金錢嗎?

Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?

我可以藉由提供GPL授權軟體的網路下載服務來收取價金嗎?

Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site?

我是GPL程式的原始著作權利人,可以要求別人嗣後散布這個軟體時,都需要支付我一筆金錢,或是主動聯絡告知我嗎?

Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me?

如果我透過散布GPL授權程式來獲取價金,我需要同時對公眾提供一份免收費的版本嗎?

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?

我能夠散布GPL程式的同時,在其上添註保密協定等附加條款嗎?

Does the GPL allow me to distribute a copy under a nondisclosure agreement?

Does the GPL allow me to distribute a modified or beta version under a nondisclosure agreement?

Does the GPL allow me to distribute a modified or beta version under a nondisclosure agreement?

Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement?

Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement?

為什麼GPL授權條款規定在散布GPL程式時,一定要把授權條款的內容重製一份併隨散布?

Why does the GPL require including a copy of the GPL with every copy of the program?

如果我寫的程式碼行數沒比GPL授權條款本文長多少,我還要用GPL授權條款來釋出我的程式碼嗎?

What if the work is not much longer than the license itself?

當我修改GPL程式時,我需要特別標著修改部份的著作權利為我所有嗎?

Am I required to claim a copyright on my modifications to a GPL-covered program?

如果一個軟體專案將公眾領域的程式碼及GPL授權的程式碼合併在一起運作,我可以只取用公眾領域的部份,然後繼續以公眾領域的方式來利用這部份的程式碼嗎?

If a program combines public-domain code with GPL-covered code, can I take the public-domain part and use it as public domain code?

我希望透過軟體寫作來提升自己的名望,且讓別人透過我的作品來認識我,如果我用GPL授權條款釋出自己的軟體,也可以達到累積名望的目標嗎?

I want to get credit for my work. I want people to know what I wrote. Can I still get credit if I use the GPL?

為了精簡檔案空間,我可以刪去GPL授權條款的前言部份,或是後段關於如何標示GPL授權軟體的相關說明嗎?

Can I omit the preamble of the GPL, or the instructions for how to use it on your own programs, to save space?

若有人說某兩個自由軟體授權條款之間是不相容的,這句話究竟是什麼意思?

What does it mean to say that two licenses are “compatible”?

所謂「授權條款與GPL有相容性」這句話,究竟是什麼意思?

What does it mean to say a license is “compatible with the GPL”?

為何原始4條款的BSD授權條款,會被判定與GPL授權條款不相容呢?

Why is the original BSD license incompatible with the GPL?

GPL授權條款中「聚合著作」與「修改著作」間的差異在哪裡,又彼此的區隔分界在哪?

What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”?

為何自由軟體基金會要求其轄下專案的貢獻者,上傳程式碼時需同步將權利讓渡予自由軟體基金會?若是我營運同類的GPL授權專案,也應該採用這樣的程式碼歸屬政策嗎?若要採行、應該如何去做?

Why does the FSF require that contributors to FSF-copyrighted programs assign copyright to the FSF? If I hold copyright on a GPL'ed program, should I do this, too? If so, how?

當我取得GPL授權軟體時,能不能取用它部份的程式碼編撰為修改著作,其後散布此一修改作品並進行商業販售?

If I use a piece of software that has been obtained under the GNU GPL, am I allowed to modify the original code into a new program, then distribute and sell that new program commercially?

除了軟體之外、我還能將GPL條款適用於其他類別的客體上嗎?

Can I use the GPL for something other than software?

我想用GPL授權條款來釋出我的程式碼,但是我可不可以同時聲明這個軟體不能被用在軍事或是商業用途上呢?

I'd like to license my code under the GPL, but I'd also like to make it clear that it can't be used for military and/or commercial uses. Can I do this?

我可以用GPL授權條款來釋出我的硬體嗎?

Can I use the GPL to license hardware?

透過「預作連結」技術預載GPL授權的執行檔以更有效率的運用其後許多的共享資料庫,這樣的利用方式會讓整個專案變成GPL授權的修改作品嗎?

Does prelinking a GPLed binary to various libraries on the system, to optimize its performance, count as modification?

LGPL授權的函式庫在Java語言的環境下被編譯,應用程式與函式庫彼此的授權狀態能夠適切地運作嗎?

How does the LGPL work with Java?

為什麼GPL-3.0要改用「增殖、傳遞」這種新的詞彙來取代傳統的「重製、散布」?

Why did you invent the new terms “propagate” and “convey” in GPLv3?

GPL3裡「傳遞」這個字,與GPL2裡「散布」這個字的定義是相同的嗎?

Is “convey” in GPLv3 the same thing as what GPLv2 means by “distribute”?

如果我僅僅拷貝GPL授權軟體自行使用,卻沒有任何後續的散布或傳遞行為,還有哪些義務性規定是我要主動遵守的嗎?

If I only make copies of a GPL-covered program and run them, without distributing or conveying them to others, what does the license require of me?

GPL-3.0認為「將程式提供予公眾」該當於程式增殖,這句話是什麼意思?難道「將程式提供予公眾」也是傳遞程式的具體方法嗎?

GPLv3 gives “making available to the public” as an example of propagation. What does this mean? Is making available a form of conveying?

既然將軟體「提供予公眾」下載時,就該當了GPL-3.0所定義「增殖、傳遞」的範圍,那什麼樣的狀況,是僅該當於「增殖」卻不算是「傳遞」呢?

Since distribution and making available to the public are forms of propagation that are also conveying in GPLv3, what are some examples of propagation that do not constitute conveying?

3版GPL授權條款如何讓GPL程式透過P2P散布更方便?

How does GPLv3 make BitTorrent distribution easier?

「Tivo化」指的是什麼東西?為什麼3版GPL授權條款要增訂條款來禁止它?

What is tivoization? How does GPLv3 prevent it?

3版的GPL授權條款禁止所有DRM技術的運用嗎?

Does GPLv3 prohibit DRM?

照3版GPL授權條款的規定,如果投票機裡內嵌GPL-3.0的程式,那麼使用機器的投票人,也有取得投票機程式源碼的權利囉?

Does GPLv3 require that voters be able to modify the software running in a voting machine?

聽說3版GPL授權條款內含有「軟體專利報復條款」,這是真的嗎?

Does GPLv3 have a “patent retaliation clause”?

在3版GPL與AGPL授權條款裡,「不論條款其他部份的文字怎麼說」這段文句怎麼解讀?

In GPLv3 and AGPLv3, what does it mean when it says “notwithstanding any other provision of this License”?

在3版AGPL授權條款的定義下,什麼樣的情況該當於「透過網路遠距存取AGPL-3.0授權的程式」,而需要受到AGPL-3.0授權條款的拘束?

In AGPLv3, what counts as “ interacting with [the software] remotely through a computer network?”

3版GPL授權條款裡「您」這個字詞與2版Apache授權條款裡說的「法律授權主體」有何不同?

How does GPLv3's concept of “you” compare to the definition of “Legal Entity” in the Apache License 2.0?

3版GPL授權條款裡「所轄程式」這個字詞指的是什麼?它是指曾經以GPL3授權釋出的所有軟體嗎?

In GPLv3, what does “the Program” refer to? Is it every program ever released under GPLv3?

如果某個用戶端的軟體是以AGPL-3.0授權的,用戶端的使用者需要將程式源碼提供給該軟體伺服器端的使用者嗎?

If some network client software is released under AGPLv3, does it have to be able to provide source to the servers it interacts with?

如何將GNU授權條款適用到您的軟體專案(Using GNU licenses for your programs)

如何將我原以(L)GPL2授權的程式,升級為以(L)GPL3授權?

How do I upgrade from (L)GPLv2 to (L)GPLv3?

可以用步驟化的解說方式,教我怎麼將GPL授權條款適用到我的程式上嗎?

為什麼我要選擇GPL來釋出我的自由軟體,而不是選用其他的自由軟體授權條款?

Why should I use the GNU GPL rather than other free software licenses?

為什麼GPL授權條款規定在散布GPL程式時,一定要把授權條款的內容重製一份併隨散布?

Why does the GPL require including a copy of the GPL with every copy of the program?

如果我寫的程式碼行數沒比GPL授權條款本文長多少,我還要用GPL授權條款來釋出我的程式碼嗎?

What if the work is not much longer than the license itself?

為了精簡檔案空間,我可以刪去GPL授權條款的前言部份,或是後段關於如何標示GPL授權軟體的相關說明嗎?

Can I omit the preamble of the GPL, or the instructions for how to use it on your own programs, to save space?

我要如何註冊自己程式的著作權,以便將其以GPL授權條款向外釋出呢?

How do I get a copyright on my program in order to release it under the GPL?

如果我任職的學校打算將我寫的程式專案包在非自由的私有軟體產品裡,我該怎麼辦呢?

What if my school might want to make my program into its own proprietary software product?

我有意願將所撰寫的程式碼以GPL的授權方式對外釋出,但也會想要將這些程式碼與不提供程式源碼的軟體專案合併運作,可以嗎?

I would like to release a program I wrote under the GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in non-free programs.

當一個程式已經依GPL授權條款釋出後,此程式的著作權利人,能否再將這個程式以專屬授權的方式授權給其他人?

Can the developer of a program who distributed it under the GPL later license it to another party for exclusive use?

美國政府機構能以GPL授權條款來釋出其職務上所撰寫的程式嗎?

Can the US Government release a program under the GNU GPL?

美國政府機構能就GPL授權的程式進行改良並後續以GPL授權的方式來釋出衍生作品嗎?

Can the US Government release improvements to a GPL-covered program?

為什麼有的GPL授權程式會聲明適用某特定GPL授權條款「以及其後版本」,這樣的機制會帶來什麼樣的效果?

Why should programs say “Version 3 of the GPL or any later version”?

限定必須要用最新版本的GNU GPL來釋出某個軟體程式,會是一個好的授權策略嗎?(Is it a good idea to use a license saying that a certain program can be used only under the latest version of the GNU GPL?)

Is it a good idea to use a license saying that a certain program can be used only under the latest version of the GNU GPL?

Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require these these designs must be free?

Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require these these designs must be free?

為什麼GNU計畫不建議將GPL適用在技術手冊的釋出上?

Why don't you use the GPL for manuals?

How does the GPL apply to fonts?

How does the GPL apply to fonts?

What license should I use for website maintenance system templates?

I am writing a website maintenance system (called a “content management system” by some), or some other application which generates web pages from templates. What license should I use for those templates?

Can I release a program under the GPL which I developed using non-free tools?

Can I release a program under the GPL which I developed using non-free tools?

I use public key cryptography to sign my code to assure its authenticity. Is it true that GPLv3 forces me to release my private signing keys?

I use public key cryptography to sign my code to assure its authenticity. Is it true that GPLv3 forces me to release my private signing keys?

照3版GPL授權條款的規定,如果投票機裡內嵌GPL-3.0的程式,那麼使用機器的投票人,也有取得投票機程式源碼的權利囉?

Does GPLv3 require that voters be able to modify the software running in a voting machine?

The warranty and liability disclaimers in GPLv3 seem specific to U.S. law. Can I add my own disclaimers to my own code?

The warranty and liability disclaimers in GPLv3 seem specific to U.S. law. Can I add my own disclaimers to my own code?

My program has interactive user interfaces that are non-visual in nature. How can I comply with the Appropriate Legal Notices requirement in GPLv3?

My program has interactive user interfaces that are non-visual in nature. How can I comply with the Appropriate Legal Notices requirement in GPLv3?

以GNU授權條款散布軟體專案的進階問答(Distribution of programs released under the GNU licenses)

Can I release a modified version of a GPL-covered program in binary form only?

Can I release a modified version of a GPL-covered program in binary form only?

I downloaded just the binary from the net. If I distribute copies, do I have to get the source and distribute that too?

I downloaded just the binary from the net. If I distribute copies, do I have to get the source and distribute that too?

I want to distribute binaries via physical media without accompanying sources. Can I provide source code by FTP instead of by mail order?

I want to distribute binaries via physical media without accompanying sources. Can I provide source code by FTP instead of by mail order?

My friend got a GPL-covered binary with an offer to supply source, and made a copy for me. Can I use the offer to obtain the source?

My friend got a GPL-covered binary with an offer to supply source, and made a copy for me. Can I use the offer to obtain the source?

Can I put the binaries on my Internet server and put the source on a different Internet site?

Can I put the binaries on my Internet server and put the source on a different Internet site?

I want to distribute an extended version of a GPL-covered program in binary form. Is it enough to distribute the source for the original version?

I want to distribute an extended version of a GPL-covered program in binary form. Is it enough to distribute the source for the original version?

I want to distribute binaries, but distributing complete source is inconvenient. Is it ok if I give users the diffs from the “standard” version along with the binaries?

I want to distribute binaries, but distributing complete source is inconvenient. Is it ok if I give users the diffs from the “standard” version along with the binaries?

Can I make binaries available on a network server, but send sources only to people who order them?

Can I make binaries available on a network server, but send sources only to people who order them?

How can I make sure each user who downloads the binaries also gets the source?

How can I make sure each user who downloads the binaries also gets the source?

Can I release a program with a license which says that you can distribute modified versions of it under the GPL but you can't distribute the original itself under the GPL?

Can I release a program with a license which says that you can distribute modified versions of it under the GPL but you can't distribute the original itself under the GPL?

I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?

I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?

A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?

A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?

Is use within one organization or company “distribution”?

Is use within one organization or company “distribution”?

If someone steals a CD containing a version of a GPL-covered program, does the GPL give him the right to redistribute that version?

If someone steals a CD containing a version of a GPL-covered program, does the GPL give him the right to redistribute that version?

What if a company distributes a copy as a trade secret?

What if a company distributes a copy as a trade secret?

Do I have “fair use” rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?

Do I have “fair use” rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?

Does moving a copy to a majority-owned, and controlled, subsidiary constitute distribution?

Does moving a copy to a majority-owned, and controlled, subsidiary constitute distribution?

Can software installers ask people to click to agree to the GPL? If I get some software under the GPL, do I have to agree to anything?

Can software installers ask people to click to agree to the GPL? If I get some software under the GPL, do I have to agree to anything?

I would like to bundle GPLed software with some sort of installation software. Does that installer need to have a GPL-compatible license?

I would like to bundle GPLed software with some sort of installation software. Does that installer need to have a GPL-compatible license?

Does a distributor violate the GPL if they require me to “represent and warrant” that I am located in the US, or that I intend to distribute the software in compliance with relevant export control laws?

Some distributors of GPL'd software require me in their umbrella EULAs or as part of their downloading process to “represent and warrant” that I am located in the US or that I intend to distribute the software in compliance with relevant export control laws. Why are they doing this and is it a violation of those distributors' obligations under GPL?

The beginning of GPLv3 section 6 says that I can convey a covered work in object code form “under the terms of sections 4 and 5” provided I also meet the conditions of section 6. What does that mean?

The beginning of GPLv3 section 6 says that I can convey a covered work in object code form “under the terms of sections 4 and 5” provided I also meet the conditions of section 6. What does that mean?

My company owns a lot of patents. Over the years we've contributed code to projects under “GPL version 2 or any later version”, and the project itself has been distributed under the same terms. If a user decides to take the project's code (incorporating my contributions) under GPLv3, does that mean I've automatically granted GPLv3's explicit patent license to that user?

My company owns a lot of patents. Over the years we've contributed code to projects under “GPL version 2 or any later version”, and the project itself has been distributed under the same terms. If a user decides to take the project's code (incorporating my contributions) under GPLv3, does that mean I've automatically granted GPLv3's explicit patent license to that user?

If I distribute a GPLv3-covered program, can I provide a warranty that is voided if the user modifies the program?

If I distribute a GPLv3-covered program, can I provide a warranty that is voided if the user modifies the program?

If I give a copy of a GPLv3-covered program to a coworker at my company, have I “conveyed” the copy to him?

If I give a copy of a GPLv3-covered program to a coworker at my company, have I “conveyed” the copy to him?

Am I complying with GPLv3 if I offer binaries on an FTP server and sources by way of a link to a source code repository in a version control system, like CVS or Subversion?

Am I complying with GPLv3 if I offer binaries on an FTP server and sources by way of a link to a source code repository in a version control system, like CVS or Subversion?

Can someone who conveys GPLv3-covered software in a User Product use remote attestation to prevent a user from modifying that software?

Can someone who conveys GPLv3-covered software in a User Product use remote attestation to prevent a user from modifying that software?

What does “rules and protocols for communication across the network” mean in GPLv3?

What does “rules and protocols for communication across the network” mean in GPLv3?

Distributors that provide Installation Information under GPLv3 are not required to provide “support service” for the product. What kind of “support service” do you mean?

Distributors that provide Installation Information under GPLv3 are not required to provide “support service” for the product. What kind of “support service” do you mean?

使用GNU授權的程式碼來撰寫衍生程式(Using programs released under the GNU licenses when writing other programs)

我可以將GPL程式與其他不相關的非自由軟體,一起灌在同一台電腦上使用嗎?

Can I use GPL-covered editors such as GNU Emacs to develop non-free programs? Can I use GPL-covered tools such as GCC to compile them?

Can I use GPL-covered editors such as GNU Emacs to develop non-free programs? Can I use GPL-covered tools such as GCC to compile them?

Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require these these designs must be free?

Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require these these designs must be free?

In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL too?

In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL too?

If I port my program to GNU/Linux, does that mean I have to release it as free software under the GPL or some other free software license?

If I port my program to GNU/Linux, does that mean I have to release it as free software under the GPL or some other free software license?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?

If I distribute a proprietary program that links against an LGPLv3-covered library that I've modified, what is the “contributor version” for purposes of determining the scope of the explicit patent license grant I'm making—is it just the library, or is it the whole combination?

Under AGPLv3, when I modify the Program under section 13, what Corresponding Source does it have to offer?

Under AGPLv3, when I modify the Program under section 13, what Corresponding Source does it have to offer?

Where can I learn more about the GCC Runtime Library Exception?

Where can I learn more about the GCC Runtime Library Exception?

將GNU授權的程式碼與其他授權程式碼結合運作(Combining work with code released under the GNU licenses)

Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2?

Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2?

How are the various GNU licenses compatible with each other?

How are the various GNU licenses compatible with each other?

GPL授權條款中「聚合著作」與「修改著作」間的差異在哪裡,又彼此的區隔分界在哪?

What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”?

Do I have “fair use” rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?

Do I have “fair use” rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?

美國政府機構能就GPL授權的程式進行改良並後續以GPL授權的方式來釋出衍生作品嗎?

Can the US Government release improvements to a GPL-covered program?

If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean that any software which uses it has to be under the GPL or a GPL-compatible license?

You have a GPL'ed program that I'd like to link with my code to build a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your program mean I have to GPL my program?

You have a GPL'ed program that I'd like to link with my code to build a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your program mean I have to GPL my program?

If so, is there any chance I could get a license of your program under the Lesser GPL?

If so, is there any chance I could get a license of your program under the Lesser GPL?

Using a certain GNU program under the GPL does not fit our project to make proprietary software. Will you make an exception for us? It would mean more users of that program.

Using a certain GNU program under the GPL does not fit our project to make proprietary software. Will you make an exception for us? It would mean more users of that program.

If a programming language interpreter is released under the GPL, does that mean programs written to be interpreted by it must be under GPL-compatible licenses?

If a programming language interpreter is released under the GPL, does that mean programs written to be interpreted by it must be under GPL-compatible licenses?

If a programming language interpreter has a license that is incompatible with the GPL, can I run GPL-covered programs on it?

If a programming language interpreter has a license that is incompatible with the GPL, can I run GPL-covered programs on it?

If I add a module to a GPL-covered program, do I have to use the GPL as the license for my module?

If I add a module to a GPL-covered program, do I have to use the GPL as the license for my module?

If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the requirements for the licenses of a plug-in?

If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the requirements for the licenses of a plug-in?

Can I apply the GPL when writing a plug-in for a non-free program?

Can I apply the GPL when writing a plug-in for a non-free program?

Can I release a non-free program that's designed to load a GPL-covered plug-in?

Can I release a non-free program that's designed to load a GPL-covered plug-in?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this by putting a “wrapper” module, under a GPL-compatible lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in between the GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this by putting a “wrapper” module, under a GPL-compatible lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in between the GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?

Can I write free software that uses non-free libraries?

Can I write free software that uses non-free libraries?

What legal issues come up if I use GPL-incompatible libraries with GPL software?

What legal issues come up if I use GPL-incompatible libraries with GPL software?

I'm writing a Windows application with Microsoft Visual C++ and I will be releasing it under the GPL. Is dynamically linking my program with the Visual C++ run-time library permitted under the GPL?

I'm writing a Windows application with Microsoft Visual C++ and I will be releasing it under the GPL. Is dynamically linking my program with the Visual C++ run-time library permitted under the GPL?

I'd like to modify GPL-covered programs and link them with the portability libraries from Money Guzzler Inc. I cannot distribute the source code for these libraries, so any user who wanted to change these versions would have to obtain those libraries separately. Why doesn't the GPL permit this?

I'd like to modify GPL-covered programs and link them with the portability libraries from Money Guzzler Inc. I cannot distribute the source code for these libraries, so any user who wanted to change these versions would have to obtain those libraries separately. Why doesn't the GPL permit this?

If license for a module Q has a requirement that's incompatible with the GPL, but the requirement applies only when Q is distributed by itself, not when Q is included in a larger program, does that make the license GPL-compatible? Can I combine or link Q with a GPL-covered program?

If license for a module Q has a requirement that's incompatible with the GPL, but the requirement applies only when Q is distributed by itself, not when Q is included in a larger program, does that make the license GPL-compatible? Can I combine or link Q with a GPL-covered program?

In an object-oriented language such as Java, if I use a class that is GPL'ed without modifying, and subclass it, in what way does the GPL affect the larger program?

In an object-oriented language such as Java, if I use a class that is GPL'ed without modifying, and subclass it, in what way does the GPL affect the larger program?

How can I allow linking of proprietary modules with my GPL-covered library under a controlled interface only?

How can I allow linking of proprietary modules with my GPL-covered library under a controlled interface only?

Consider this situation: 1) X releases V1 of a project under the GPL. 2) Y contributes to the development of V2 with changes and new code based on V1. 3) X wants to convert V2 to a non-GPL license. Does X need Y's permission?

Consider this situation: 1) X releases V1 of a project under the GPL. 2) Y contributes to the development of V2 with changes and new code based on V1. 3) X wants to convert V2 to a non-GPL license. Does X need Y's permission?

I have written an application that links with many different components, that have different licenses. I am very confused as to what licensing requirements are placed on my program. Can you please tell me what licenses I may use?

I have written an application that links with many different components, that have different licenses. I am very confused as to what licensing requirements are placed on my program. Can you please tell me what licenses I may use?

Can I use snippets of GPL-covered source code within documentation that is licensed under some license that is incompatible with the GPL?

Can I use snippets of GPL-covered source code within documentation that is licensed under some license that is incompatible with the GPL?

不當利用GNU授權程式的侵權問題(Questions about violations of the GNU licenses)

當我發現疑似GPL侵權利用的案件,後續應該做些什麼?

What should I do if I discover a possible violation of the GPL?

誰有權利去處理GPL程式的不當利用或侵權問題?

Who has the power to enforce the GPL?

I heard that someone got a copy of a GPL'ed program under another license. Is this possible?

I heard that someone got a copy of a GPL'ed program under another license. Is this possible?

Is the developer of a GPL-covered program bound by the GPL? Could the developer's actions ever be a violation of the GPL?

Is the developer of a GPL-covered program bound by the GPL? Could the developer's actions ever be a violation of the GPL?

I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?

I just found out that a company has a copy of a GPL'ed program, and it costs money to get it. Aren't they violating the GPL by not making it available on the Internet?

Can I use GPLed software on a device that will stop operating if customers do not continue paying a subscription fee?

Can I use GPLed software on a device that will stop operating if customers do not continue paying a subscription fee?

What does it mean to “cure” a violation of GPLv3?

What does it mean to “cure” a violation of GPLv3?

If someone installs GPLed software on a laptop, and then lends that laptop to a friend without providing source code for the software, have they violated the GPL?

If someone installs GPLed software on a laptop, and then lends that laptop to a friend without providing source code for the software, have they violated the GPL?

Suppose that two companies try to circumvent the requirement to provide Installation Information by having one company release signed software, and the other release a User Product that only runs signed software from the first company. Is this a violation of GPLv3?

Suppose that two companies try to circumvent the requirement to provide Installation Information by having one company release signed software, and the other release a User Product that only runs signed software from the first company. Is this a violation of GPLv3?

 
 
notes_and_translations/frequently_asked_questions_about_the_gnu_licenses.txt · 上一次變更: 2015/09/26 03:05 (外部編輯)
Recent changes RSS feed Creative Commons License Valid XHTML 1.0 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki
Drupal Garland Theme for Dokuwiki