30

I'm developing an application which requires a third party framework which is under an Eclipse Public Licence (EPL). The application is a server-side commercial application which will be running on my servers. The EPL software is distributed as binaries (jar files). I'm only using the packages and am not making any contribution, i.e. not making any changes to the source.

Under EPL I believe I'm not a "Contributor" nor am I making a "Contribution". But if I want to make my software available to be installed at some offsite server I'm having trouble with REQUIREMENTS of EPL:

b.iv - "states that source code for the Program is available from such Contributor, and informs licensees how to obtain it in a reasonable manner on or through a medium customarily used for software exchange".

Does this mean that if I where to modify the source code of the 3rd party framework for my own purposes I would need to distribute all of my source code?

EPL is supposed to be commercially friendly but it doesn't seem that way to me.

code-gijoe
  • 6,949
  • 14
  • 67
  • 103
  • I just found out further information that convinces me of the acceptability of using EPL software. The GPL, which is pretty much the most restrictive license for commercial outfits has a loophole by which you don't have to distribute the source: see http://fossfaq.com/questions/5/what-is-the-asp-loophole – Thomas Mar 31 '11 at 22:29
  • 4
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about licensing or legal issues, not programming or software development. – Jeffrey Bosboom Jun 07 '15 at 00:42

1 Answers1

32

The way that I understand your question is "If I change part of the framework, do I need to redistribute all of the source code of my application, even the parts that aren't part of the framework?". If that is the proper interpretation of your question, then no, you do not need to distribute all the code of your application.

EPL is a weak copyleft license, however it is a non-viral copyleft so it only applies to the source of what was EPL'ed, not to what you build on top of the EPL project. Thus, it does not require that you distribute the source to your application, only the changes made to the framework itself. The terms of the EPL only apply to the source of the library, not the source of your application. Your application's code will governed by its own license (as you are not redistributing it, ostensibly a simple "I own all the rights to this code" license).

Basically, as long as you are not using a library governed by a fully copyleft license, then you should be fine.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Do not take this as real legal advice.

Hendy Irawan
  • 20,498
  • 11
  • 103
  • 114
Thomas
  • 4,889
  • 4
  • 24
  • 19
  • Well thanks, as far I as have an understanding of the licence (not a layer neither) if I don't touch the source code I'm even safer. Yes it's not a copyleft licence but I did not had it clear by reading the licence which code has to be made available to the licensees. It probably is the contributions to the 3rd party EPL source. – code-gijoe Feb 08 '11 at 20:37
  • I've downvoted this since Eclipse *is* a copy-left license and changes to the library should be made available. Additions are fine, its the changes that needs to be provided source for. – Max Rydahl Andersen Dec 19 '12 at 10:47
  • @MaxRydahlAndersen I have edited the statements (accidentally did it before logging in) is the new phrasing acceptable to you? – Thomas Jan 19 '13 at 17:06
  • 10
    "not a fully copyleft" is wrong since it is a copyleft. It is just not as strong or viral (depending on your point of view) as for example GPL. Better rephrase would be "EPL is a copyleft license, but it only applies to the source of what was EPL'ed, not to what you build on top of this EPL project." – Max Rydahl Andersen Jan 25 '13 at 14:20
  • 1
    @MaxRydahlAndersen: Okay, changed the wording again. – Thomas Jan 27 '13 at 19:07
  • Would this apply to a single class (say a utility class) that I have taken and added as part of my source repo? To be specific, this utility class - http://grepcode.com/file/repository.grepcode.com/java/eclipse.org/3.7.2/org.eclipse.equinox.security/ui/1.1.0/org/eclipse/equinox/internal/provisional/security/ui/X500PrincipalHelper.java#X500PrincipalHelper If I include this into my source code and make modifications to this class, should I only publish the changes made to this class? – MediumOne Dec 04 '17 at 15:02