On 08.11.2017 15:53, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 08-11-17 15:06, Solomon Peachy wrote:
On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 08:54:03AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
Is there anyone who could raise concerns to Apple about the license change? Maybe convince them to dual-license it or something?
Well, Michael Sweet (mswet AT apple.com) remains the primary developer of CUPS, and this has been raised on the CUPS mailing list in response to the announcement he posted.
Here's the latest response [1] on that thread:
I don't think static linking against libcups is common enough to be a serious concern - CUPS is fairly ubiquitous and easily falls under the "OS-supplied library" exception in the GPL 2. And existing GPL-2-only software that *does* statically link/copy CUPS code can continue to do so with CUPS 2.2.x and earlier.
Someone should reply to that that the OS exception only applies when distributing binaries separate from said OS, not for binaries bundled with the OS, which all Linux distros are (AFAIK, IANAL).
apparently Fedora Legal FAQ has a different opinion:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ?rd=Licensing/FAQ#What.27s_the_d...
"However, we consider that the OpenSSL library is a system library, as defined by the GPL, on Fedora and therefore we are allowed to ship GPL software that links to the OpenSSL library."