Note that IANAL, either

mfoss — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:35:29 +0000

Note that IANAL, either :)

shansen wrote:

if we are installing ejabberd on site while we install our software, is that "distributing" it with our software?

Maybe, but even if it were, it isn't a problem.

You can include on your services 'install and configure a private Jabber server'. It could be a bonus service, too. You could even include ejabberd binary installer on your software backup CD. And require a bonus for that CD.

The FAQ about GPL explains:

<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney">Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?</a> wrote:

Yes

As you mentioned, the important part is how GPL and non-GPL software communicates, and not lying about the GPL software authorship and license.

shansen wrote:

Our server components wouldn't touch the jabber server except as a client (to send automated messages), and there's no integration between them. But if we are installing it at the same time as our own software, and our own software uses it as a client, is that a combined product?

Let's read the FAQ:

<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation">What is the difference between "mere aggregation" and "combining two modules into one program"?</a> wrote:

Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program.

By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.

I think a Jabber client and a Jabber server are not a combined product. They use XMPP, a standard internet protocol, as many other interoperable Jabber clients and servers do.

<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem">I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?</a> wrote:

If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two separate programs--but you have to do it properly. The issue is simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing. Why do we care about this? Because we want to make sure the users clearly understand the free status of the GPL-covered software in the collection.

So, when you sell your product, you must say to your client that the server is the GPL-licensed ejabberd and if they want the source code you can send them by email for free at any time.

<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnchangedJustBinary">I downloaded just the binary from the net. If I distribute copies, do I have to get the source and distribute that too?</a> wrote:

Yes.

In summary: I think there is no problem on your usage of ejabberd. Just make sure your clients know the server they get is GPL.

ejabberd - Comments for "License Question"

Note that IANAL, either