[Asterisk-Dev] MPL(openh323)/ GPL License issues

[Bill Jennings]

On Thursday 22 April 2004 16:36, Derek Smithies wrote:
> Hi,
>  On a slightly different topic to Bill Jenning's email,
>
> ast_h323.cpp and ast_h323.h contain in their header::
>
>  * chan_h323 is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of
> the License, or * (at your option) any later version.
>  *
>  * chan_h323 is distributed WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even
>  * the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
> PARTICULAR * PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more
> details. *
>  * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public
> License * along with this program; if not, write to the Free
> Software * Foundation, Inc., 675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139,
> USA.
>
>
> The conclusion I come to on reading this is that
> a)ast_h323.X is under the GPL licence
>
> b)ast_h323.X does not contain the clause which gives Linux Support
>   services the right to license it differently.
>
> c)There is a license violation, because MPL code (which is what
> openh323 is) cannot be linked to GPL code.
>
> d)There is a potential license issue here (and I am  not a license
>   lawyer enough to know if it is) does this mean ast_h323.X cannot
> be linked to asterisk.
>
>    The reason for this: asterisk == GPL + Linux Services exemption.
>                         ast_h323 == GPL
>      If asterisk is released under an alternative license (as Linux
>         Services has), then ast_h323 is in conflict.

It looked to me like the only thing that LSS licensed under a non-GPL 
license was the paragraph that char *key() returns.

But, then...

That paragraph cannot be included in a GPL-Licensed module 
(catch-22?).

>
>
> Derek.
> ===============================================================