Re: [OT] Licence question

[Biswapesh Chattopadhyay <biswapesh_chatterjee tcscal co in>]

Owen:

Thanks for the feedback. I think I'll avoid the whole hassle by simly
reading the docs instead (I'm sure that's O.K ?)

Rgds,
Biswa.

On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 21:33, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 06:43, Biswapesh Chattopadhyay wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Sorry for the cross-post - I'm not sure which list can give me the right
> > answer.
> >
> > I have a licence question: can I read the source code of a GPL-ed
> > library to get implementation ideas while developing a competing LGPL-ed
> > library (without actually using the source code, of course) ?
> >
> > Specifically, there is a QT scintilla wrapper
> > (http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/qscintilla/index.php) and I'm
> > planning to write a similar high level OO GTK+ wrapper around Scintilla
> > for anjuta/anjuta2 (or extending the current GtkScintilla2 wrapper if
> > that fits in).
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> 
> It's a bit fuzzy -
> 
> There is nothing theoretically wrong about reading the code,
> *as long as you don't copy anything copyrightable*
> 
> Proving that is the case can be pretty much impossible, so,
> for commercial licensed code, you definitely don't want
> to look at the sources. (For example, I have a policy of
> never reading the Qt code.)
> 
> But if it's other open-source code, then it's probably OK
> to take bit more of relaxed attitude.
> 
> But what I'd suggest is simple: ask the author - if they say
> it's OK for you to use ideas from their code in a LGPL
> library, then you *know* it's OK. If they say it's not
> OK, then don't do it, even if it's legally OK. I doubt
> there is enough of interest in a scintilla wrapper to
> be worth a flamewar.
> 
> Regards,
>                                               Owen
> 
> 
>