| <?php require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/app.class.php"); require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/nav.class.php"); require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/menu.class.php"); $App = new App(); $Nav = new Nav(); $Menu = new Menu(); include($App->getProjectCommon()); # All on the same line to unclutter the user's desktop' |
| |
| #***************************************************************************** |
| # |
| # eplfaq.php |
| # |
| # Author: Mike Milinkovich |
| # Date: 2005-11-07 |
| # |
| # Description: Type your page comments here - these are not sent to the browser |
| # |
| # |
| #**************************************************************************** |
| |
| # |
| # Begin: page-specific settings. Change these. |
| $pageTitle = "Eclipse Public License 1.0 (EPL) Frequently Asked Questions"; |
| $pageKeywords = "epl, cpl, legal, faq, foundation, eclipse, license, licenses"; |
| $pageAuthor = "Mike Milinkovich, Nov. 21, 2005"; |
| |
| # Add page-specific Nav bars here |
| # Format is Link text, link URL (can be http://www.someothersite.com/), target (_self, _blank), level (1, 2 or 3) |
| # $Nav->addNavSeparator("My Page Links", "downloads.php"); |
| # $Nav->addCustomNav("My Link", "mypage.php", "_self", 1); |
| # $Nav->addCustomNav("Google", "http://www.google.com/", "_blank", 1); |
| |
| # End: page-specific settings |
| # |
| |
| # Paste your HTML content between the EOHTML markers! |
| $html = <<<EOHTML |
| |
| <div id="midcolumn"> |
| <h1>$pageTitle</h1> |
| <p><strong>For informational purposes only.</strong></p> |
| <p>This FAQ attempts to provide answers to commonly asked questions |
| related to the <a href="../org/documents/epl-v10.php">Eclipse |
| Public License (EPL)</a>. It is provided for informational purposes |
| only. It is not part of, nor does it modify, amend, or supplement the |
| terms of the EPL. The EPL is a legal agreement that governs the rights |
| granted to material licensed under it, so please read it carefully. If |
| there is any conflict between this FAQ and the EPL, the terms of the EPL shall |
| govern. This FAQ should not be regarded as legal advice. If you |
| need legal advice, you must contact your own lawyer.</p> |
| |
| <div class="homeitem3col"> |
| <h3>Table of Contents</h3> |
| <ol> |
| <li><a href="#CPLEPL">What is the relationship between the CPL and the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#WHYEPL">Why was the EPL written?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#EPLDIFFER">Specifically how does the EPL differ from the CPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#EPLVERSION">What is the latest version of the EPL</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#MEMAPPROVE">Do all Eclipse Foundation members approve of the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#TRANSITION">How and when will the Eclipse Foundation transition from the |
| CPL to the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#EPLOSI">Is the EPL approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI)?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#LICAPP">What is required for OSI license approval?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#BUSADVOS">What are the business advantages of the Open Source model?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#TECHADVOS">What are the technical advantages of the Open Source model?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#PARTIESEPL">How are the parties defined in the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#ANONCONTR">Can a Contributor remain anonymous?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#RECRIGHTS">What rights do Contributors grant Recipients under EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#USEINANOTHER">Does the EPL allow me to take |
| the Source Code for a Program licensed under it and include all or part of |
| it in another program licensed under the GPL, |
| BSD license or other Open Source license?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#COMPILEWOMOD">Can I take a Program licensed |
| under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the |
| result?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#SOURCEWOBJ">Do I need to include the source |
| code for such Program with the object code distribution?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#PROPPROD">When I incorporate a portion of a |
| Program licensed under the EPL into my own proprietary product distributed |
| in object code form, can I use a single license for the full product, in |
| other words, covering the portion of the Program plus my own code?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#AGREESTEWARD">The EPL states that it can be |
| changed by the Agreement Steward. Does a Contributor have the choice of |
| redistributing a previously distributed Program under the old or the new |
| version of the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#MODNODIST">If I modify a Program licensed |
| under the EPL, but never distribute it to anyone else, do I have to make my |
| modifications available to others?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#MODDIST">If I modify a Program licensed |
| under the EPL and distribute the object code of the modified Program for |
| free, must I make the source code available?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#MODULEDIST">If I write a module to add to a |
| Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the module |
| along with the rest of the Program, must I make the source code to my module |
| available in accordance with the terms of the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#SRCREDIST">What are my obligations if |
| I copy source code obtained from Eclipse.org and licensed under the Eclipse |
| Public License and include it in my product that I then distribute?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#EPLWARRANTY">Does the EPL offer any |
| warranty with regard to the Program?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#GETANSWER">This document does not have the answer to my |
| question. How can I get my question answered?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#DERIV">Some open source software communities specify what they mean by a |
| "derivative work". Does the Eclipse Foundation have a position on this?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#LINK">Some free software communities say that linking to their code automatically |
| means that your program is a derivative work. Is this the position of the Eclipse Foundation?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#EXAMPLE">I‘m a programmer not a lawyer, can you give me a clear cut example of |
| when something is or is not a derivative work?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#USEEPL">I am starting my own open source software project. Does the Eclipse |
| Foundation allow me to use the EPL for my project?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#CODEGEN">Many Eclipse tools and wizards use code templates which are included |
| in the application that is generated. Is the code generated by these tools |
| considered a derivative work that must be licensed under the EPL?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#3RDPARTY">What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed |
| by Eclipse projects?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#OSICOMPLIANT">Is an OSI-compliant license a requirement for all third-party code |
| redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#GPLCOMPATIBLE">Are the Eclipse Public License (EPL) and the General Public License (GPL) |
| compatible?</a></li> |
| <li><a href="#DUALLIC">For dual-licensed projects, which license terms apply?</a></li> |
| </ol> |
| </div> |
| <p> </p> |
| <h3>Frequently Asked Questions</h3> |
| </blockquote> |
| <ol> |
| <li><strong><a name="CPLEPL">What is the relationship between IBM’s Common Public |
| License (CPL) and the newer Eclipse Public License (EPL)?</a></strong><br/> |
| </b>The Eclipse codebase was originally distributed under the |
| CPL. The EPL was derived from |
| <a href="http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cpl.html" target="_blank">CPL |
| version 1.0</a>. As a result, much of the information provided in the |
| <a href="http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-cplfaq/index.html" target="_blank">Common |
| Public License (CPL) Frequently Asked Questions</a> document is relevant to the |
| EPL, as well. The purpose of this FAQ is to highlight the differences.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="WHYEPL">Why was the EPL written?</a></strong><br/> |
| The EPL was written specifically for the <a href="../org/" target="_top">Eclipse |
| Foundation</a>. First, it changes the Agreement Steward, formerly IBM |
| for the CPL, |
| to now be the Eclipse Foundation for the EPL. Second, it addresses concerns |
| some Eclipse Foundation members had with how the CPL deals with possible |
| patent litigation.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="EPLDIFFER">Specifically how does the EPL differ from the CPL?</a><br/> |
| </strong>Section 7 of the CPL contained the following language:<br/> |
| <br/> |
| <em>"If |
| Recipient institutes patent litigation against a Contributor with respect to |
| a patent applicable to software (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in |
| a lawsuit), then any patent licenses granted by that Contributor to such |
| Recipient under this Agreement shall terminate as of the date such |
| litigation is filed. In |
| addition, if Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity |
| (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the |
| Program itself (excluding combinations of the Program with other software or |
| hardware) infringes such Recipient’s patent(s), then such Recipient’s rights |
| granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate as of the date such litigation is |
| filed."<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </em> |
| The first sentence was removed in the EPL. |
| Many members and prospective members believed that the first sentence was |
| overly broad and |
| viewed it as an inhibitor to the continued growth of the Eclipse |
| eco-system. The second sentence remains unchanged in the EPL.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| The current <a href="../org/documents/Eclipse_IP_Policy.pdf">Eclipse |
| Foundation Intellectual Property Policy</a> further clarifies the general |
| principles under which the Eclipse Foundation shall accept contributions, |
| license contributions, license materials owned by the Eclipse Foundation, |
| and manage other intellectual property matters.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="EPLVERSION">What is the latest version of the EPL?</a><br/> |
| </strong><a href="../org/documents/epl-v10.html">Version 1.0</a> |
| is the latest version of the EPL. It is also the initial version of |
| the EPL.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="MEMAPPROVE">Do all Eclipse Foundation members approve of the |
| EPL?</a><br/> |
| </strong>Yes, the Eclipse Foundation membership approved the new EPL |
| unanimously. Future members must agree to abide by the EPL and the |
| Intellectual Property Policy as part of joining the Eclipse Foundation and |
| signing the <a href="../org/documents/Eclipse%20MEMBERSHIP%20AGMT%202003_11_10%20Final.pdf">Eclipse |
| Foundation Membership Agreement</a>.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="TRANSITION">How and when will the Eclipse Foundation transition |
| from the CPL to the EPL?</a><br/> |
| </strong>For details, see the <a href="cpl2epl/CPL2EPLTransitionPlan.pdf">CPL to EPL Transition Plan</a> (.pdf) |
| and the <a href="cpl2epl/cpl2eplfaq.php">CPL to EPL Transition Plan FAQ</a>.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="EPLOSI">Is the EPL approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI)?</a><br/></strong> |
| Yes, the EPL has been approved. Version 1.0 was approved in May |
| 2004. See the complete <a href="http://opensource.org/licenses/" target="_blank">list |
| of OSI-approved licenses</a>.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="LICAPP">What is required for OSI license |
| approval?</a><br/></strong> |
| A license qualifies for OSI approval if it conforms to the OSI’s "Open |
| Source Definition" or "OSD." The OSD covers nine topics of |
| concern. Chief among these is the requirement that a license not restrict |
| any party from selling or giving away the software. Further, the Program |
| must include source code, must allow distribution in source code as well as |
| compiled form, and must allow modifications and derived works. Find more |
| information on the <a href="http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php" target="_blank">OSD</a> |
| at opensource.org.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="BUSADVOS">What are the business advantages |
| of the Open Source model?<br/></strong> |
| </a>An Open Source community provides a way for individuals and |
| companies to collaborate on projects that would be difficult to achieve on their own..<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="TECHADVOS">What are the technical |
| advantages of the Open Source model?</strong></a><br/> |
| The Open Source model has the technical advantage of turning users into |
| potential co-developers. With source code readily available, users will help |
| you debug quickly and promote rapid code enhancements. "Given a bit of |
| encouragement, your users will diagnose problems, suggest fixes, and help |
| improve the code far more quickly than you could unaided." (The |
| Cathedral and the Bazaar, Eric Steven Raymond. See <a href="http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/" target="_blank">http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/</a>)<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="PARTIESEPL">How are the parties defined in |
| the EPL?</strong></a><br/> |
| There are two types of parties to the EPL. They are "Contributors" |
| and "Recipients." Contributors include an initial Contributor, who |
| is the person or entity that creates the initial code distributed under the EPL, |
| and subsequent Contributors, who originate changes or additions to the code |
| (the combination referred to as the "Program"). Any person or |
| entity that redistributes the Program is also a Contributor. Recipients |
| include anyone who receives the Program under the EPL, including |
| Contributors.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="ANONCONTR">Can a Contributor remain anonymous?</strong></a><br/> |
| No. Except for those who simply redistribute the Program, each Contributor |
| must identify itself as the originator of its Contribution in a way that |
| later Recipients will be able to readily see.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="RECRIGHTS">What rights do Contributors grant Recipients under EPL?</strong></a><br/> |
| Contributors license Recipients under the rights that they have in their |
| Contributions.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="USEINANOTHER">Does the EPL allow me to take |
| the Source Code for a Program licensed under it and include all or part of |
| it in another program licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), |
| Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) license or other Open Source license?</strong></a><br/> |
| No. Only the owner of software can decide whether and how to license it to |
| others. Contributors to a Program licensed under the EPL understand that |
| source code for the Program will be made available under the terms of the EPL. |
| Unless you are the owner of the software or have received permission from |
| the owner, you are not authorized to apply the terms of another license to |
| the Program by including it in a program licensed under another Open Source |
| license.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="COMPILEWOMOD">Can I take a Program licensed |
| under the EPL, compile it without modification, and commercially license the |
| result?</strong></a><br/> |
| Yes. You may compile a Program licensed under the EPL without modification |
| and commercially license the result in accordance with the terms of the EPL.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="SOURCEWOBJ">Do I need to include the source |
| code for such Program with the object code distribution?</strong></a><br/> |
| No. But you do need to include a statement that the source code is available |
| from you and information on how to obtain it.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </font></li> |
| <li><strong><a name="PROPPROD">When I incorporate a portion of a |
| Program licensed under the EPL into my own proprietary product distributed |
| in object code form, can I use a single license for the full product, in |
| other words, covering the portion of the Program plus my own code?</strong></a><br/> |
| Yes. The object code for the product may be distributed under a single |
| license as long as it references the EPL portion and complies, for that |
| portion, with the terms of the EPL.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="AGREESTEWARD">The EPL states that it can be |
| changed by the Agreement Steward. Does a Contributor have the choice of |
| redistributing a previously distributed Program under the old or the new |
| version of the EPL?</strong></a><br/> |
| While Contributions are licensed under the version of the License under |
| which they are originally distributed, the EPL provides for the ability of |
| any Contributor to choose between that version or a later version.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="MODNODIST">If I modify a Program licensed |
| under the EPL, but never distribute it to anyone else, do I have to make my |
| modifications available to others?</strong></a><br/> |
| No. If you do not distribute the modified Program, you do not have to make |
| your modifications available to others.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="MODDIST">If I modify a Program licensed |
| under the EPL and distribute the object code of the modified Program for |
| free, must I make the source code available?</strong></a><br/> |
| Yes. By distributing the modified Program, even if it is only a free version |
| of the object code, you are obligated to make the source code to the |
| modified Program available to others.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="MODULEDIST">If I write a module to add to a |
| Program licensed under the EPL and distribute the object code of the module |
| along with the rest of the Program, must I make the source code to my module |
| available in accordance with the terms of the EPL?</strong></a><br/> |
| No, as long as the module is not a derivative work of the Program.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="SRCREDIST">What are my obligations if |
| I copy source code obtained from Eclipse.org and licensed under the Eclipse |
| Public License and include it in my product that I then distribute?</a></strong><br/> |
| Source code licensed under the EPL may only be |
| redistributed under the EPL.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="EPLWARRANTY">Does the EPL offer any |
| warranty with regard to the Program?</strong></a><br/> |
| No. The Program released under the EPL is provided on an "as is" |
| basis, without warranties or conditions of any kind.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="GETANSWER">This document does not have the answer to my |
| question. How can I get my question answered?</a><br/> |
| </strong> |
| You may want to check the <a href="legalfaq.php">Eclipse |
| Foundation Legal Frequently Asked Questions </a>document to see if your |
| question is answered there. If not, please send a note to the |
| <a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">Eclipse Management Office</a> and we will do our best |
| to get back to you.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="DERIV">Some open source software communities specify what they mean by a |
| "derivative work". Does the Eclipse Foundation have a position on this?</a><br/></strong> |
| As described in article 1(b)(ii) of the Eclipse Public License, "...Contributions do not |
| include additions to the Program which: (i) are separate modules of software distributed in |
| conjunction with the Program under their own license agreement, and (ii) are not derivative |
| works of the Program." The definition of derivative work varies under the copyright laws of |
| different jurisdictions. The Eclipse Public License is governed under U.S. law. Under the U.S. |
| Copyright Act, a "derivative work" is defined as <em>"...a work based upon one or |
| more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, |
| motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other |
| form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, |
| annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of |
| authorship, is a "derivative work"."</em> The Eclipse Foundation interprets the term |
| "derivative work" in a way that is consistent with the definition in the U.S. Copyright Act, |
| as applicable to computer software. You will need to seek the advice of your own legal counsel in |
| deciding whether your program constitutes a derivative work. <br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="LINK">Some free software communities say that linking to their code automatically |
| means that your program is a derivative work. Is this the position of the Eclipse Foundation?</a><br/></strong> |
| No, the Eclipse Foundation interprets the term "derivative work" in a way that is consistent |
| with the definition in the U.S. Copyright Act, as applicable to computer software. Therefore, |
| linking to Eclipse code might or might not create a derivative work, depending on all of the other |
| facts and circumstances. <br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="EXAMPLE">I‘m a programmer not a lawyer, can you give me a clear cut example of |
| when something is or is not a derivative work?</a><br/></strong> |
| If you have made a copy of existing Eclipse code and made a few minor revisions to it, that is a |
| derivative work. If you"ve written your own Eclipse plug-in with 100% your own code to implement |
| functionality not currently in Eclipse, then it is not a derivative work. Scenarios between those two |
| extremes will require you to seek the advice of your own legal counsel in deciding whether your program |
| constitutes a derivative work.<br/><br/> |
| For clarity, merely interfacing or interoperating with Eclipse plug-in APIs (without modification) does |
| not make an Eclipse plug-in a derivative work.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="USEEPL">I am starting my own open source software project. Does the Eclipse |
| Foundation allow me to use the EPL for my project?</a><br/></strong> |
| Yes. The EPL is an OSI-approved open source license and may be used unaltered by projects regardless of |
| where they are hosted.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="CODEGEN">Many Eclipse tools and wizards use code templates which are included |
| in the application that is generated. Is the code generated by these tools |
| considered a derivative work that must be licensed under the EPL?</a><br/></strong> |
| Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to this question. To the |
| extent that the code generated by a wizard is purely functional in nature and |
| therefore not the proper subject matter for copyright protection, it could be |
| argued that it is not subject to copyright protection, and therefore is not a |
| derivative work. An example of that type of code would include calls to APIs |
| or other technical instructions which are dictated by functional or technical |
| requirements. Moreover, to the extent the generated code is a very small part |
| of the final overall work, there is an argument that such use would be di |
| minimus, and the final product or application should not be considered to be a |
| derivative work. Finally, to the extent developers who use the generated code |
| make many changes and additions to the code, there is also an argument that the |
| resultant application is not a derivative work. Of course, these are just |
| arguments and not "bright line" tests, and therefore each position could be |
| subject to differing viewpoints. Eclipse cannot take a position on this issue, |
| as it will ultimately be a question of the facts and circumstances associated |
| with a particular use.<br/> |
| <br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="3RDPARTY">What licenses are acceptable for third-party code redistributed |
| by Eclipse projects?</a><br/></strong> |
| Eclipse views license compatibility through the lens of enabling successful commercial adoption |
| of Eclipse technology in software products and services. We wish to create a commercial ecosystem |
| based on the redistribution of Eclipse software technologies in commercially licensed software |
| products. Determining whether a license for third-party code is acceptable often requires the |
| input and advice of Eclipse’s legal advisors. If you have any questions, please contact |
| <a href="mailto:license@eclipse.org">license@eclipse.org</a>.<br/><br/> |
| The current list of licenses approved for use by third-party code redistributed by Eclipse projects is: |
| <ul> |
| <li>Apache Software License 1.1 </li> |
| <li>Apache Software License 2.0 </li> |
| <li>W3C Software License </li> |
| <li>Common Public License Version 1.0 </li> |
| <li>IBM Public License 1.0 </li> |
| <li>Mozilla Public License Version 1.1</li> |
| <li>Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) Version 1.0</li> |
| <li>GNU Free Documentation License Version 1.3</li> |
| <li>BSD</li> |
| <li>MIT</li></ul> |
| Licenses that are not approved for use include: |
| <ul> |
| <li>GNU GPL 2.0</li> |
| <li>GNU LGPL</li> |
| <li>Sun Binary Code License Agreement</li></ul> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="OSICOMPLIANT">Is an OSI-compliant license a requirement for all third-party code |
| redistributed by Eclipse projects?</a><br/></strong> |
| Eclipse fully supports the Open Source Initiative’s certification of open source licenses, |
| and the Eclipse Public License is certified as such. However, there are licenses for software |
| content which meet Eclipse’s requirements for compatibility with the EPL and downstream |
| commercial re-distribution that are not OSI certified, and Eclipse projects may make use of such |
| licenses after review and approval by the Eclipse Foundation.<br/><br/> |
| The reverse is also true: there are OSI-compliant licenses are not compatible with the EPL or do |
| not permit downstream commercial re-distribution. Such licenses are not used by Eclipse projects.<br/><br/> |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="GPLCOMPATIBLE">Are the Eclipse Public License (EPL) and the General Public License (GPL) compatible?</a><br/></strong> |
| The EPL and the GPL are not compatible in any combination where the result would be considered either: |
| (a) a "derivative work" (which Eclipse interprets consistent with the definition of that term in the |
| U.S. Copyright Act ) or (b) a work "based on" the GPL code, as that phrase is used in the |
| <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html">GPLv2</a>, |
| <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html">GPLv3</a> |
| or the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html">GPL FAQ</a> as applicable. |
| Further, you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any scenario where source |
| code under those licenses are both the same source code module.<br/><br/> |
| Based upon the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/">position</a> |
| of the Free Software Foundation, you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any |
| scenario where linking exists between code made available under those licenses. The above applies to |
| both GPL version 2 and GPL version 3. |
| </li> |
| <li><strong><a name="DUALLIC">For Eclipse projects which are dual-licensed, your file headers state that |
| the code is being made available under two licenses. For example: "This program and the accompanying materials |
| are made available under the terms of the Eclipse Public License v1.0 and Eclipse Distribution License v. 1.0 |
| which accompanies this distribution." What is meant by the use of the conjunction "and"?</a><br/></strong> |
| The code is being made available under both of the licenses. The consumer of the code can select which |
| license terms they wish to use, modify and/or further distribute the code under. |
| </li> |
| </ol> |
| </div> |
| <!-- remove the entire <div> tag to omit the right column! --> |
| <div id="rightcolumn"> |
| <div class="sideitem"> |
| <h6>Related Links</h6> |
| <ul> |
| <li><a href="../org/documents/epl-v10.php">Eclipse Public License</a></li> |
| <li><a href="http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cpl.html" target="_blank">Common Public License</a></li> |
| <li><a href="legalfaq.php">Eclipse Legal FAQ</a></li> |
| <li><a href="epl/notice.php">Eclipse Software Use Agreement</a></li> |
| </ul> |
| </div> |
| </div> |
| |
| EOHTML; |
| |
| |
| # Generate the web page |
| $App->generatePage($theme, $Menu, $Nav, $pageAuthor, $pageKeywords, $pageTitle, $html); |
| ?> |
