Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Interpreted code vs GPL clarification

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010

    Default Interpreted code vs GPL clarification

    My case is pretty much identical to Blender/Blender Game Engine. Blender has got a python api(bpy) which is used to implement plugins and games. Blender source is GPL and Blender is linking against GPL libraries afaik. They have got an exception for scripts, stating that they are not affected by the GPL. Is this actually possible?

    FSF FAQ:
    The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data
    when the interpreter is extended to provide “bindings” to other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses through these bindings.

    Is an API in an interpreted language something one would call a "binding"? And in general, how can an interpreter affect the license of the code/data it interprets?

    A more extreme example. Lets assume someone wrote a flash interpreter inclusive class libraries using GPL libs. Would that make all flash scripts GPL? Obviously it can not, right?

    I've assumed the FSF would be the instance to ask and contacted them per e-mail, but have got no response. Are there any GPL experts who could eventually clarify this issue?

    PS: Personal pov is appreciated, links to/info from someone with GPL legalese experience are preferred though.
    Last edited by log0; 07-30-2012 at 04:58 AM. Reason: add ps

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts