Open Source

38827 readers

103 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Does this conflict with GPL-3.0 License ? (kbin.earth)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm not at all an expert with open source licensing, but does the following conflict with open source licensing ?

I don't mean any ill intent to the developers of the application, but want to inform them if there is something wrong. (Sorry if my question feels dumb, I'm just getting familiar with licensing terms)

I've been following this app for sometime and it recently had its alpha release. While taking a look at the Terms and Conditions section of the app, I came across the Application Use section which reads:

Application Use

3.1. License

Pockaw grants you a personal, non-transferable, non-exclusive license to use the app for personal or small business financial management purposes. 3.2. Prohibited Use

You agree not to: Reverse engineer, decompile, or modify Pockaw. Use the app for illegal activities. Exploit the app in ways not intended, such as reselling it as your own product.

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

If they are using someone else's GPL code and adding requirements like that, then yes, that is infringement.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sounds like they either used a boilerplate EULA or hired a lawyer who is unaware of the requirements imposed by the GPL. If it's the latter then I hope they can get their money back.

EDIT: yeah, this looks like an unmodified GPL to me: https://github.com/layground/pockaw/blob/master/LICENSE.md

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

They also have LGPL mentioned in their readme. I'm so confused what happened. I was thinking of switching to this app, but after reading more about the app, feel like staying with Monekin

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Looks like they're generally confused. The license file is GPLv3, the readme claims to be licensed under LGPLv3 and they have those terms. Potentially the terms apply only to official binaries, similar to VSCode.
I think this would require some form of CLA, or they couldn't redistribute contributed code under their terms.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for the added context. I didn't even notice that LGPL was mentioned in the readme. I was thinking of switching to this app, now idk, might as well stay with my current one.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, but I wouldn't bother bringing it up to them. It's fine if they want to provide it under multiple licenses. Since they make it available under the GPL, you can do those things under that license.

If they do change something, it will probably be to change the license away from GPL.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks! I was thinking of contacting them, but after reading more about it, I'm not going to. I was thinking of switching to this app completely, but now feel conflicted