Should I attribute open-source DLLs that I ship?











up vote
5
down vote

favorite












I ship a GPL-licensed exe "Foo" (not mine) with my exe, and with Foo - some DLLs that it uses.



These DLLs are licensed under various open-source licenses.



Should I ship the copyright statements of those DLLs? And the full texts of their licenses?










share|improve this question


















  • 3




    Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
    – Brandin
    2 days ago

















up vote
5
down vote

favorite












I ship a GPL-licensed exe "Foo" (not mine) with my exe, and with Foo - some DLLs that it uses.



These DLLs are licensed under various open-source licenses.



Should I ship the copyright statements of those DLLs? And the full texts of their licenses?










share|improve this question


















  • 3




    Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
    – Brandin
    2 days ago















up vote
5
down vote

favorite









up vote
5
down vote

favorite











I ship a GPL-licensed exe "Foo" (not mine) with my exe, and with Foo - some DLLs that it uses.



These DLLs are licensed under various open-source licenses.



Should I ship the copyright statements of those DLLs? And the full texts of their licenses?










share|improve this question













I ship a GPL-licensed exe "Foo" (not mine) with my exe, and with Foo - some DLLs that it uses.



These DLLs are licensed under various open-source licenses.



Should I ship the copyright statements of those DLLs? And the full texts of their licenses?







gpl






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 2 days ago









Stefan Monov

1593




1593








  • 3




    Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
    – Brandin
    2 days ago
















  • 3




    Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
    – Brandin
    2 days ago










3




3




Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
– Brandin
2 days ago






Does the license of the GPL'ed Foo.exe contain a linking exception? Normally, when you distribute a GPL program, you obligate yourself to disclose all source code. It doesn't matter where the code comes from, so saying "I didn't write those DLLs" is not an excuse. One exception may exist for "system DLLs", but I suspect that doesn't apply in this case.
– Brandin
2 days ago












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
11
down vote













When redistributing GPL-licensed binaries, you must reproduce each copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty and ship the full text of the license (see section 1 of the GPLv2). In addition, you have to (quoting section 3):




a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)




Commercial distributions typically choose option b. For the GPLv3, similar terms apply.



Other terms apply for other open-source licenses, but you typically have to ship with all copyright notices and license texts.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


















  • As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
    – Richard Barber
    14 hours ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "619"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fopensource.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7645%2fshould-i-attribute-open-source-dlls-that-i-ship%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
11
down vote













When redistributing GPL-licensed binaries, you must reproduce each copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty and ship the full text of the license (see section 1 of the GPLv2). In addition, you have to (quoting section 3):




a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)




Commercial distributions typically choose option b. For the GPLv3, similar terms apply.



Other terms apply for other open-source licenses, but you typically have to ship with all copyright notices and license texts.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


















  • As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
    – Richard Barber
    14 hours ago

















up vote
11
down vote













When redistributing GPL-licensed binaries, you must reproduce each copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty and ship the full text of the license (see section 1 of the GPLv2). In addition, you have to (quoting section 3):




a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)




Commercial distributions typically choose option b. For the GPLv3, similar terms apply.



Other terms apply for other open-source licenses, but you typically have to ship with all copyright notices and license texts.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


















  • As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
    – Richard Barber
    14 hours ago















up vote
11
down vote










up vote
11
down vote









When redistributing GPL-licensed binaries, you must reproduce each copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty and ship the full text of the license (see section 1 of the GPLv2). In addition, you have to (quoting section 3):




a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)




Commercial distributions typically choose option b. For the GPLv3, similar terms apply.



Other terms apply for other open-source licenses, but you typically have to ship with all copyright notices and license texts.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









When redistributing GPL-licensed binaries, you must reproduce each copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty and ship the full text of the license (see section 1 of the GPLv2). In addition, you have to (quoting section 3):




a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,



c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)




Commercial distributions typically choose option b. For the GPLv3, similar terms apply.



Other terms apply for other open-source licenses, but you typically have to ship with all copyright notices and license texts.







share|improve this answer








New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer






New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 days ago









nwellnhof

2113




2113




New contributor




nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






nwellnhof is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
    – Richard Barber
    14 hours ago




















  • As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
    – Richard Barber
    14 hours ago


















As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
– Richard Barber
14 hours ago






As you can see the question pertains to binary subcomponents and their various licenses. Here is an example. Sometimes I deploy apps including a binary subcomponent which is licensed as basically this: opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause As you can see, clause 2 applies, so the license for that component gets included in the deployment bundle.
– Richard Barber
14 hours ago




















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fopensource.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7645%2fshould-i-attribute-open-source-dlls-that-i-ship%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Ellipse (mathématiques)

Quarter-circle Tiles

Mont Emei