Hi All,
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
Thanks, Prashant
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:54 +0530, Prashant Shewale wrote:
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for
commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
I would guess that virtually all, if not all, of the people on this list are not lawyers, including me. Therefore, any advice you get here, I would not pay attention too :) ESPECIALLY if you plan on marketing a commercial project, I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of the opinions you might get here.
I can give you the following facts, however. In general, the RHQ Server is GPL licensed, the core RHQ Agent wrapper (e.g. AgentMain.java) is GPL licensed but the internal, pluggable plugin container (and all of its internals and the plugins themselves) are LGPL licensed.
The plugin container and plugins are licensed with LGPL to allow commercial or third party offerings to embed the management agent functionality (which we call the plugin container) in other Java application runtimes to perform management/monitoring functionality for you. We did this, for example, for the old JBossAS 5 management web console (called Embedded Jopr) - and JBossAS 5 is LGPL (which is one reason why we gave the plugin container the same license).
You are free to run write your own plugins, obviously, and plug them into an out-of-box RHQ environment. That's clear. You are also free to embedd the plugin container itself into your own Java application (due to the LGPL license) such as was already done in another LGPL project: JBossAS 5.
If you need more specific information, we'd have to have our lawyers talk to your lawyers :)
John "IANAL" Mazz
As Mazz said, and I will re-iterate, we are not lawyers. This is NOT legal advice :-) If you follow this advice, and it all goes horribly wrong, you can't blame us :-) That said, here goes. Other's on the list, please correct my errors/omissions....
So first off its perfectly possible to use RHQ as part of a *commercial* product. That's exactly what Red Hat does with JBoss ON: http://www.redhat.com/products/jbossenterprisemiddleware/operations-network/
But what you're really asking about is using RHQ as part of a *closed source* product. This is where the distinction which mazz draws between the GPL and LGPL is important.
If your product *alters* any of RHQ's LGPL/GPL code (e.g. tweaks to the ui), or *links* (e.g. imports in .java) to any of the RHQ GPL code, then when you distribute your product you will need to also distribute that source under the GPL or LGPL as appropriate.
But, if your product just links to the RHQ LGPL code (e.g you are writing a plugin to manage/monitor something) then there is no requirement to release your code, when you distribute your product. For example there are ISVs that build their closed source apps and distribute them on top of JBoss (which is LGPL), similarly we've worked with partners to develop plugins for RHQ which are not open source.
Thanks Charles
----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:54 +0530, Prashant Shewale wrote:
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for
commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
I would guess that virtually all, if not all, of the people on this list are not lawyers, including me. Therefore, any advice you get here, I would not pay attention too :) ESPECIALLY if you plan on marketing a commercial project, I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of the opinions you might get here.
I can give you the following facts, however. In general, the RHQ Server is GPL licensed, the core RHQ Agent wrapper (e.g. AgentMain.java) is GPL licensed but the internal, pluggable plugin container (and all of its internals and the plugins themselves) are LGPL licensed.
The plugin container and plugins are licensed with LGPL to allow commercial or third party offerings to embed the management agent functionality (which we call the plugin container) in other Java application runtimes to perform management/monitoring functionality for you. We did this, for example, for the old JBossAS 5 management web console (called Embedded Jopr) - and JBossAS 5 is LGPL (which is one reason why we gave the plugin container the same license).
You are free to run write your own plugins, obviously, and plug them into an out-of-box RHQ environment. That's clear. You are also free to embedd the plugin container itself into your own Java application (due to the LGPL license) such as was already done in another LGPL project: JBossAS 5.
If you need more specific information, we'd have to have our lawyers talk to your lawyers :)
John "IANAL" Mazz
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
Thanks everybody for your meaningful response. It gave me more clarity on my doubts.
What I got now is 1. I can develop a RHQ agent side plugin (*closed-source*) for managing my application and distribute it as commercial plugin and charge licence for that. 2. If I develop a RHQ server side plugin then I have to distribute source code under GPL 3. If I develop my own custom UI using server side remote APIs (just like CLI), I have to distribute source code under GPL. (Idea here is to develop something like coregui.war)
Can somebody please let me know what I have to do if I write a new server application or mobile application which consumes RHQ's REST API and show my own apps UI? I know REST API is part of RHQ server and may be licensed as GPL, but still want to get more clarity on this.
Thanks again, Prashant
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Charles Crouch ccrouch@redhat.com wrote:
As Mazz said, and I will re-iterate, we are not lawyers. This is NOT legal advice :-) If you follow this advice, and it all goes horribly wrong, you can't blame us :-) That said, here goes. Other's on the list, please correct my errors/omissions....
So first off its perfectly possible to use RHQ as part of a *commercial* product. That's exactly what Red Hat does with JBoss ON: http://www.redhat.com/products/jbossenterprisemiddleware/operations-network/
But what you're really asking about is using RHQ as part of a *closed source* product. This is where the distinction which mazz draws between the GPL and LGPL is important.
If your product *alters* any of RHQ's LGPL/GPL code (e.g. tweaks to the ui), or *links* (e.g. imports in .java) to any of the RHQ GPL code, then when you distribute your product you will need to also distribute that source under the GPL or LGPL as appropriate.
But, if your product just links to the RHQ LGPL code (e.g you are writing a plugin to manage/monitor something) then there is no requirement to release your code, when you distribute your product. For example there are ISVs that build their closed source apps and distribute them on top of JBoss (which is LGPL), similarly we've worked with partners to develop plugins for RHQ which are not open source.
Thanks Charles
----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:54 +0530, Prashant Shewale wrote:
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for
commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
I would guess that virtually all, if not all, of the people on this list are not lawyers, including me. Therefore, any advice you get here, I would not pay attention too :) ESPECIALLY if you plan on marketing a commercial project, I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of the opinions you might get here.
I can give you the following facts, however. In general, the RHQ Server is GPL licensed, the core RHQ Agent wrapper (e.g. AgentMain.java) is GPL licensed but the internal, pluggable plugin container (and all of its internals and the plugins themselves) are LGPL licensed.
The plugin container and plugins are licensed with LGPL to allow commercial or third party offerings to embed the management agent functionality (which we call the plugin container) in other Java application runtimes to perform management/monitoring functionality for you. We did this, for example, for the old JBossAS 5 management web console (called Embedded Jopr) - and JBossAS 5 is LGPL (which is one reason why we gave the plugin container the same license).
You are free to run write your own plugins, obviously, and plug them into an out-of-box RHQ environment. That's clear. You are also free to embedd the plugin container itself into your own Java application (due to the LGPL license) such as was already done in another LGPL project: JBossAS 5.
If you need more specific information, we'd have to have our lawyers talk to your lawyers :)
John "IANAL" Mazz
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
----- Original Message -----
Thanks everybody for your meaningful response. It gave me more clarity on my doubts.
What I got now is
- I can develop a RHQ agent side plugin (*closed-source*) for
managing my application and distribute it as commercial plugin and charge licence for that. 2. If I develop a RHQ server side plugin then I have to distribute source code under GPL 3. If I develop my own custom UI using server side remote APIs (just like CLI), I have to distribute source code under GPL. (Idea here is to develop something like coregui.war)
Can somebody please let me know what I have to do if I write a new server application or mobile application which consumes RHQ's REST API and show my own apps UI? I know REST API is part of RHQ server and may be licensed as GPL, but still want to get more clarity on this.
That is a great question. Somebody asked this same question about MediaWiki: http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/GPL-Linking-application-against-REST-API-re... and the conclusion seemed to be you should be fine using the REST API, i.e. you don't need to GPL the code calling the REST api.
Good link from that article: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation would seem to concur with that.
Standard disclaimer: This can definitely get very nuanced as the gnu.org link implies. You should seek legal advice rather than assuming it is as above.
Thanks again, Prashant
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Charles Crouch < ccrouch@redhat.com > wrote:
As Mazz said, and I will re-iterate, we are not lawyers. This is NOT legal advice :-) If you follow this advice, and it all goes horribly wrong, you can't blame us :-) That said, here goes. Other's on the list, please correct my errors/omissions....
So first off its perfectly possible to use RHQ as part of a *commercial* product. That's exactly what Red Hat does with JBoss ON: http://www.redhat.com/products/jbossenterprisemiddleware/operations-network/
But what you're really asking about is using RHQ as part of a *closed source* product. This is where the distinction which mazz draws between the GPL and LGPL is important.
If your product *alters* any of RHQ's LGPL/GPL code (e.g. tweaks to the ui), or *links* (e.g. imports in .java) to any of the RHQ GPL code, then when you distribute your product you will need to also distribute that source under the GPL or LGPL as appropriate.
But, if your product just links to the RHQ LGPL code (e.g you are writing a plugin to manage/monitor something) then there is no requirement to release your code, when you distribute your product. For example there are ISVs that build their closed source apps and distribute them on top of JBoss (which is LGPL), similarly we've worked with partners to develop plugins for RHQ which are not open source.
Thanks Charles
----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:54 +0530, Prashant Shewale wrote:
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
I would guess that virtually all, if not all, of the people on this list are not lawyers, including me. Therefore, any advice you get here, I would not pay attention too :) ESPECIALLY if you plan on marketing a commercial project, I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of the opinions you might get here.
I can give you the following facts, however. In general, the RHQ Server is GPL licensed, the core RHQ Agent wrapper (e.g. AgentMain.java) is GPL licensed but the internal, pluggable plugin container (and all of its internals and the plugins themselves) are LGPL licensed.
The plugin container and plugins are licensed with LGPL to allow commercial or third party offerings to embed the management agent functionality (which we call the plugin container) in other Java application runtimes to perform management/monitoring functionality for you. We did this, for example, for the old JBossAS 5 management web console (called Embedded Jopr) - and JBossAS 5 is LGPL (which is one reason why we gave the plugin container the same license).
You are free to run write your own plugins, obviously, and plug them into an out-of-box RHQ environment. That's clear. You are also free to embedd the plugin container itself into your own Java application (due to the LGPL license) such as was already done in another LGPL project: JBossAS 5.
If you need more specific information, we'd have to have our lawyers talk to your lawyers :)
John "IANAL" Mazz
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
Thanks Charles.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Charles Crouch ccrouch@redhat.com wrote:
----- Original Message -----
Thanks everybody for your meaningful response. It gave me more clarity on my doubts.
What I got now is
- I can develop a RHQ agent side plugin (*closed-source*) for
managing my application and distribute it as commercial plugin and charge licence for that. 2. If I develop a RHQ server side plugin then I have to distribute source code under GPL 3. If I develop my own custom UI using server side remote APIs (just like CLI), I have to distribute source code under GPL. (Idea here is to develop something like coregui.war)
Can somebody please let me know what I have to do if I write a new server application or mobile application which consumes RHQ's REST API and show my own apps UI? I know REST API is part of RHQ server and may be licensed as GPL, but still want to get more clarity on this.
That is a great question. Somebody asked this same question about MediaWiki:
http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/GPL-Linking-application-against-REST-API-re... and the conclusion seemed to be you should be fine using the REST API, i.e. you don't need to GPL the code calling the REST api.
Good link from that article: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation would seem to concur with that.
Standard disclaimer: This can definitely get very nuanced as the gnu.orglink implies. You should seek legal advice rather than assuming it is as above.
Thanks again, Prashant
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Charles Crouch < ccrouch@redhat.com > wrote:
As Mazz said, and I will re-iterate, we are not lawyers. This is NOT legal advice :-) If you follow this advice, and it all goes horribly wrong, you can't blame us :-) That said, here goes. Other's on the list, please correct my errors/omissions....
So first off its perfectly possible to use RHQ as part of a *commercial* product. That's exactly what Red Hat does with JBoss ON:
http://www.redhat.com/products/jbossenterprisemiddleware/operations-network/
But what you're really asking about is using RHQ as part of a *closed source* product. This is where the distinction which mazz draws between the GPL and LGPL is important.
If your product *alters* any of RHQ's LGPL/GPL code (e.g. tweaks to the ui), or *links* (e.g. imports in .java) to any of the RHQ GPL code, then when you distribute your product you will need to also distribute that source under the GPL or LGPL as appropriate.
But, if your product just links to the RHQ LGPL code (e.g you are writing a plugin to manage/monitor something) then there is no requirement to release your code, when you distribute your product. For example there are ISVs that build their closed source apps and distribute them on top of JBoss (which is LGPL), similarly we've worked with partners to develop plugins for RHQ which are not open source.
Thanks Charles
----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 10:54 +0530, Prashant Shewale wrote:
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
I would guess that virtually all, if not all, of the people on this list are not lawyers, including me. Therefore, any advice you get here, I would not pay attention too :) ESPECIALLY if you plan on marketing a commercial project, I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of the opinions you might get here.
I can give you the following facts, however. In general, the RHQ Server is GPL licensed, the core RHQ Agent wrapper (e.g. AgentMain.java) is GPL licensed but the internal, pluggable plugin container (and all of its internals and the plugins themselves) are LGPL licensed.
The plugin container and plugins are licensed with LGPL to allow commercial or third party offerings to embed the management agent functionality (which we call the plugin container) in other Java application runtimes to perform management/monitoring functionality for you. We did this, for example, for the old JBossAS 5 management web console (called Embedded Jopr) - and JBossAS 5 is LGPL (which is one reason why we gave the plugin container the same license).
You are free to run write your own plugins, obviously, and plug them into an out-of-box RHQ environment. That's clear. You are also free to embedd the plugin container itself into your own Java application (due to the LGPL license) such as was already done in another LGPL project: JBossAS 5.
If you need more specific information, we'd have to have our lawyers talk to your lawyers :)
John "IANAL" Mazz
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
rhq-users mailing list rhq-users@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-users
http://openacs.org/about/licensing/open-source-licensing provides a layman's summary of the GPL. The part about derived works says:
"anyone can create a derivative work of the code and redistribute it, as long as the resulting source code is also made available at redistribution time, and as long as the resulting source code is licensed under the terms of the GPL."
There's a bunch of other pages that try to summarize the terms of the GPL, e.g.: http://drupal.org/licensing/faq
Of course, your best bet is to consult with a copyright attorney.
On 02/01/2012 12:24 AM, Prashant Shewale wrote:
Hi All,
I would like to ask if we can use RHQ framework as base for
commercial project. I would like to design management software for our enterprise software using RHQ as a base. I know RHQ is licensed as GPL and so its difficult to sell closed source product. Can you please provide me some guidelines?
Thanks, Prashant
rhq-users@lists.stg.fedorahosted.org