-1

I really want to use PGM for an application that I'm working on for one my companies. That application will never be distributed, it's for internal use only. There is an implementation called OpenPGM and a (I believe) derivative work javapgm that implements the protocol. Both are licensed under the LGPL.

My question is if I read the source code for these libraries and use that knowledge to help create an Erlang PGM implementation, would that be considered a derived work? I would prefer to release my implementation under the BSD license, so I'm not trying to take something for nothing, but I want to play fair.

In short then:

  1. Would / should my version be released under the LGPL?
  2. If my company is using it internally only, would there be any restrictions on how it could use that library? (it would never be distributed outside the company).
  3. Is it in the spirit of the LGPL license to do what I want to do?

Thanks in advance! :)

PeterM
  • 2,534
  • 6
  • 31
  • 38
  • 2
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about licensing or legal issues, not programming or software development. [See here](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/274963/questions-about-licensing/274964#274964) for details, and the [help] for more. – JasonMArcher Jun 03 '15 at 03:46
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about licensing / copyright / intellectual property / legal issues, not programming or software development. See the [help/on-topic] for more. – Pang Jun 05 '15 at 03:34

1 Answers1

0

I don't think it would be a derived work unless there is a 1:1 correlation between lines of code in your thing and the open source code. We're not talking about a patent here, where the concept of the invention is important.

  1. If it is only used internally then it doesn't have to be.

  2. You could never be certain that it doesn't accidentally leak out or get shared or included in another project.

  3. You should try to work with OpenPGM to make the Erlang interface that you need; then it is open source, other people may help maintain it for you, you get a free code review

koan
  • 3,596
  • 2
  • 25
  • 35
  • Well I would release it either under the BSD license, or if it is a derived work, then the LGPL license. It would prefer BSD license because then it is easier for everyone but I want to play fair under the terms of the LGPL. – PeterM Jun 22 '13 at 15:30
  • Emailed the OpenPGM guys who were really happy to hear from me. Should have just pinged them first - I think licensing concerns has a lot of people (myself included) running a bit scared... – PeterM Jun 23 '13 at 15:19
  • I'm sure that working with an established project; they can give you a lot of help and useful tips from their experience. – koan Jun 23 '13 at 18:55