Re: Does KDE have a policy for shipping libraries licensed under the Apache license?

[Simon Redman]

Hi Andrius,

Thanks for your input.

That is the textbook answer, but doesn't actually fit this case. GPLv3 is only compatible with Apache because it has an exclusion for system libraries, but KDE Connect is an Android app so there is no concept of system libraries.

It doesn't get to the core of the issue: What is KDE's position?

To take another angle:
If I assume the whole package falls under the "entire work", and if I package Apache v2 and my own GPL v2 code together, and distribute it, I'd have broken the GPLv2 license of my own code because I cannot relicence the Apache parts of the "whole work", but I'm not going to sue myself so there is no legal issue.

The simple example gets complicated when it's a global organization, and not just my code but the code of other contributors as well. But that's why I'm asking if there's a defined policy.

Thanks,
Simon


On December 19, 2022 5:54:38 PM EST, "Andrius Štikonas" <stikonas at kde.org> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Quick check seems to indicate that KDE Connect license is:
>
>*GPL-2.0-only* OR GPL-3.0-only OR LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL
>
>Apache v2 licensed code is not compatible with GPL-2.0-only but
>is compatible with GPLv3. So by combining KDE Conenct with
>that library you lose right to redistribute the whole thing
>as GPL2 but you still have the right to redistribute combined code under
>
>GPL-3.0-only OR LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL
>
>I.e. you are essentially dropping GPLv2 support and only keeping GPLv3.
>So you must first check that you have no GPLv2 only dependencies.
>
>Kind regards,
>Andrius
>
>2022 m. gruodžio 19 d., pirmadienis 23:34:11 CET Simon Redman rašė:
>> KDE Connect has had this PR languishing for a couple of years, with a 
>> question I am not able to answer.
>> https://invent.kde.org/network/kdeconnect-android/-/merge_requests/192
>> 
>> The author has added a (very useful) library, which happens to be 
>> licensed under the Apache v2 license.
>> 
>> KDE Connect code is GPL-licensed. GPL section 2 says that the entire 
>> work must be distributed as GPL. 
>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html
>> 
>> In my eyes, the only meaningful part of the work is the source code, at 
>> which level the concept of distributing a library does not apply. The 
>> .apk that we give to users is just a convenience to them, they could 
>> just as well build it themselves. The .apk contains both the KDE Connect 
>> GPL code and the Apache-licensed libraries, but by itself has no 
>> specific license (and doesn't claim to).
>> 
>> But my view don't matter, what matters is what happens in court, in the 
>> event anyone ever accuses KDE of violating license terms. As I am not 
>> qualified to expose KDE to any additional risk, is there a policy (or 
>> accepted precedent) for distributing Apache-licensed libraries?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Simon
>> 
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20221219/5e3b81c0/attachment.htm>