Licence question regarding GPLv2 Ruby script

[anonymous]

Hi all,

The Ruby beautifier script
(http://www.arachnoid.com/ruby/rubyBeautifier.html) is released under
the GPLv2 licence.

I understand what the GPLv2 means for a source code which has to be
compiled and so on like the Ruby interpreter. In the case of a Ruby
script, I'm not sure to understand correctly all the licence terms.

If I execute only the script from my application (an IDE like
application) to format a Ruby source, do I have to release my
application under the GPLv2 licence ?

Thanks in advance.

 

[tsela.cg]

Hi all,

The Ruby beautifier script
(http://www.arachnoid.com/ruby/rubyBeautifier.html) is released under
the GPLv2 licence.

I understand what the GPLv2 means for a source code which has to be
compiled and so on like the Ruby interpreter. In the case of a Ruby
script, I'm not sure to understand correctly all the licence terms.

If I execute only the script from my application (an IDE like
application) to format a Ruby source, do I have to release my
application under the GPLv2 licence ?

I am by no means a lawyer nor a GPL expert, but my understanding is
that you would have to release your application under the GPL only if
it is a derivative work of the Ruby beautifier script. This means:
- if you include the source code of the script directly in your own
source code (for instance making it a method). This is the clearest
case of "derivative work".
- if you require it in your code (assuming your program is in Ruby),
which is Ruby's equivalent of linking. This action also makes your
program a derivative work.
However, if you only call the script as an external program (giving it
an input file and letting it do its work), then I think your program
and that script fall under the "mere aggregation" rule, and you don't
have to release your program under the GPL. Do note that you still
have to abide by the GPL if you are distributing the Ruby beautifier
script, but only for the beautifier script itself.

You might want to take a look at the Free Software Foundation FAQ (I'd
give the link, but my browser is acting up strangely at the moment and
I cannot open the FSF site. It should be easy to google it up anyway).
I think they answer that very question. Do not take my answer as
definitive answer since, as I warned you at the beginning, I am
neither a lawyer nor a GPL expert.

Hope that helps.
Christophe.

 

[Kristoffer Lundén]
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 

[Ruby Fan]

See this FAQ:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation

In short: no, you don't have to.

-- Kristoffer

Thanks Matz and Kristoffer for your replies.
The link to the GPL FAQ makes things more clear.