[Mono-list] Mono and Patents....

[Andy Lewis]

Jonathan -

Many thanks for this answer. I suspected this to be the case, but wants 
confirmation from someone more familiar with it.

Jonathan Pryor wrote:

>On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 14:19, Andy Lewis wrote:
><snip/>
>  
>
>>First, regarding Mono licensing. It appears to be a mix of GPL, LGPL, 
>>and X11 licenses. Does this combination allow me to develop commercial 
>>applications using mono and distribute them using the "free" licenses, 
>>provided that I am not distributed modified Mono libraries or 
>>components, and only my own code is closed source? Or does that require 
>>a different (non-free)  license?
>>    
>>
>
>Yes, depending on what your app does.
>
>The runtime assemblies (*.dll; all assemblies a managed program is
>likely to reference) are under the MIT/X11 license.  As such, you can
>freely use them, copy them, integrate them into your own proprietary
>apps, print the source, start a fire, whatever. [1]
>
>The runtime libraries (*.so, such as libmono.so, libmint.so) are
>licensed under the LGPL.  As such, you can link against them, permitting
>better integration between managed and unmanaged code (such as an
>existing unmanaged application, like Evolution).
>
>The applications (*.exe, such as mcs.exe, mono, mint, etc.) are GPL. 
>You wouldn't link against them anyway, but you can't create a
>proprietary C# compiler based on MCS, for example.
>
>Hopefully that clears matters up for you.
>
> - Jon
>
>[1] I'm not liable for any fires started in this fashion. :-)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@lists.ximian.com
>http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>  
>