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.
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.