Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Mupen64Plus 2.0 API licensing question (for those who don't speak lawyer)

paulscode

paulscode

New member
I have a license-related question, which I tried to answer by studying the GPL text. However, after digging through the legal mumbo-jumbo that is the GPL, I am not really any more certain now than when I started. I thought I would post the question here in case a more legally-minded person can answer it for me.

Mupen64Plus is licensed by the GPL, so obviously any program or code derived from its sources will also be GPL'ed. So far so good. But then there is the Mupen64Plus 2.0 API. Since Mupen64Plus is licensed by the GPL and not the LGPL, would any front-end developed for interfacing that API also be bound by the GPL? The text does mention "identifiable sections not derived from the Program" that can be "reasonably considered independent and separate works", but I'm not sure where one would draw that line, and if it would include a GUI that is designed to call the interface methods of a program licensed by the GPL.

I just wanted to clear this up, as I'm planning to develop some front-ends at some point. If they turn out pretty nice, I may even try and sell a couple of them, but obviously I need to verify that they wouldn't have to be GPL'ed, first.
 
R

Richard42

Emulator Developer
Apparently not even the lawyers know the answer to this question:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Linking_and_derived_works

I can't speak for all of the authors of Mupen64Plus but I can offer my own opinion. If you distribute a non-GPL front-end application and you do not package the Mupen64Plus library with it (ie, user would have to get Mupen64Plus for himself), I would be okay with that. However if you distributed the Mupen64Plus core/plugin libraries along with the non-GPL front-end, then you should display a prominent message to the user that the core/plugin libraries are covered by the GPL license, and either distribute the Mupen64Plus source code as well or give the users an offer to send them the source code, as specified by the GPL text.

Either way, it's unlikely that anyone would sue you. The FSF and open source authors typically just go after people that are clearly in violation of the license and doing something really wrong, not just something that might be interpreted to be wrong in some cases.
 
OP
paulscode

paulscode

New member
I would be distributing these hypothetical front-ends by themselves anyway (most people searching for a front-end would probably already have downloaded the program, anyway). Specifically, I'm hoping to design some front-ends to sell on the Android market once I or someone else is able to successfully port Mupen64Plus to Android.
 
OP
paulscode

paulscode

New member
On a related note, would there be any restrictions on using the Mupen64Plus logo (incorporating it into the front-end's GUI, for example)?
 
R

Richard42

Emulator Developer
paulscode said:
On a related note, would there be any restrictions on using the Mupen64Plus logo (incorporating it into the front-end's GUI, for example)?
Click to expand...

The license of the logo SVG seems to be murky. I didn't make this, and I don't remember who did. You could ask on IRC; somebody might remember. It's published on wikipedia, which states that the license is GPL. I don't know how an SVG image can be licensed under the GPL.

One thing that I would like to avoid is user confusion about what is or is not 'mupen64plus'. Users should not be filing bugs for your application on my issue tracker. :) I think it would be great to put a small M64+ logo or tag line "Uses Mupen64Plus core" on the GUI, but your front-end should probably not have 'mupen64plus' in the name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top