[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL and nib files

From: Adam Fedor
Subject: Re: GPL and nib files
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:05:40 -0700

On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, at 07:08 PM, Jesse Hammons wrote:
My question: does a GNUStep or Cocoa .nib file qualify as an "interface
definition file?"  I am confused in the sentence whether the "interface
definition file" refers to interfaces for object code (i.e. header
files) or whether it refers to Graphical User Interface definition
files, such as Windows rc files, Mac rez files, (icons, etc), or
cocoa/gnustep nibs.

I don't know. From the intention it appears like it might be source.

On a related note, are nib files considered code or data?  I am making
an application that runs on GNUStep and Cocoa.  The code for this
application is GPL (because I am using someone else GPL code for part
of the functionality).  I would like to restrict distribution of the
nib files (which were created by myself only).  I am wondering if this
would  violate the requirement for distributing "complete source code."

I would consider it data, but I think that's irrelevant. What you probably want to pay attention to is section 2, which describes what constitutes a 'work' (i.e. everything you distribute with the program). In that case you would be violating the GPL. I think the only way to avoid that is to distribute the nib files separately.

What about images, sounds, icons and similar types of materials?  If I
combine GPL code with proprietary data, and ship resulting binary, is
that a violation of the GPL?  If I provide access to the source code
for a version of the application that is completely equal in
functionality (same code) but uses generic images does that qualify as
being the "preferred form of the work for making modifications to it?"

I think so (see above).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]