[Mono-devel-list] ByteFX development

Michael Torrie torriem at chem.byu.edu
Thu Sep 16 20:39:17 EDT 2004

On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 18:06, Chris Morgan wrote:
> > Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the licence of the
> > MySql database only allows you to develop apps that are open source. If you
> > are intending on selling/distributing a commercial product that uses MySql
> > as the backend, then you are required you to purchase a comercial licence
> > for MySql.
> >
> > Because of this, the LGPL version of ByteFX is only of any use to open
> > source projects. If you want to sell a comercial product, you need to
> > purchase the licence, which I guess will also include their commercial
> > version of the GPL library that MySql provides.
> >
> > I think this might eliminate the need to develop the LGPL version if the
> > main intent is that it can be use in commercial applications.
> After some discussion on #mono it seems like MySql simply isn't being clear.  
> The ByteFX implementation is fully managed, it doesn't link to any mysql 
> libraries.  From mysql's website:
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Using_the_MySQL_software_under_a_commercial_license.html
> "When you distribute a non-GPL application that works only with the MySQL 
> software and ship it with the MySQL software. This type of solution is 
> considered to be linking even if it's done over a network."

Linking against their libraries is one thing.  Speaking their network
protocol and still being forced to GPL is another.  That's just plain
bull.  That may be what MySQL would want, but it's just not legal. 
That's not what the GPL says, and it certainly is against the spirit of
the GPL as expressed by the FSF.  Sounds like it is time for a new
clause in the GPL to clarify this.

Given this questionable interpretation of the GPL on their part, I will
never use MySQL where I can help it.  PostgreSQL seems to do the job
just fine and is not encumbered by bizarre attempts at restriction.

This is very microsoft-esque and I don't like it.  Surely a network
protcol can be reverse engineered for "interoperability."


> That is the only questionable claim that they seem to make.  It seems kind of 
> unreasonable to think that just the act of talking to a MySql database could 
> cause you to have to GPL your program.  ByteFX would fall under this clause, 
> if the clause is even something that the GPL specifies.
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Michael Torrie <torriem at chem.byu.edu>

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list