Using FreeBASIC for commercial software development
Using FreeBASIC for commercial software development
Are there any reasons (legally) that would prohibit using FreeBASIC to develop commercial software?
-Vince
-Vince
-
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: May 23, 2007 21:52
- Location: Cut Bank, MT
- Contact:
Nope, no reasons whatsoever AFAIK. Of course, any other resources you use to develop software commercially you must also be legally entitled to (whether free or purchased).
Check the FreeBasic license, but I'm pretty sure there's no reason you can't use it to develop commercial software. I've seen posts from other people doing it here, so...
Check the FreeBasic license, but I'm pretty sure there's no reason you can't use it to develop commercial software. I've seen posts from other people doing it here, so...
-
- Posts: 5494
- Joined: Sep 12, 2005 20:06
- Location: California
So I can't create a program that is "MY" creation if I link to "fbgfx.bi"?The only restriction is actually with the Graphics library since it is licensed under the GNU LGPL.
What about "FreeImage" or "FBSound"?
I would like to figure these things out before I waste any more time developing a game that I can't sell as my own creation.
-Vince
-
- Posts: 8586
- Joined: May 28, 2005 3:28
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 2428
- Joined: Jul 19, 2006 19:17
- Location: Sunnyvale, CA
- Contact:
for networking cha0s' chisock library is also free for all uses. as for gfxlib, lillo and everyone who's contributed to it would need to ok adding the commercial use clause like the rtlib. But like it was mentioned earlier, it is perfectly legal to sell a game published under the GPL, you just have to provide sources.
The LGPL does not limit your ability to use the routines in a commercial product, nor does it require you to release your source code. The LGPL protects the library itself, not products created using it. It differs from the GPL in that aspect, as well as a few others. Furthermore, licenses do not have the legal strength of a copyright, but unless you are blatantly stealing someone else's copyrighted work and claiming it as your own, this also does not apply here. FBsound, for example, is copyrighted by D.J.Peters. In this context, that means you cannot legally take FBsound and sell it as if you owned it. The only license you have to be careful of is the GPL itself, as it is one of the most restrictive licenses ever devised, but ironically, also one of the most ineffective (look at PySol for a great example of how the GPL fails to actually protect products and developers). I personally use a revised BSD license for all freeware/public domain work, and a standard, highly restrictive license for all commercial products regardless of the compiler and/or tools used to produce that product. I avoid the GPL at all costs.
If you really want to protect your commercial products, you MUST have them legally copyrighted by the government of your country. In the USA, it is also highly recommended to trademark your product name, if possible.
If you really want to protect your commercial products, you MUST have them legally copyrighted by the government of your country. In the USA, it is also highly recommended to trademark your product name, if possible.
-
- Posts: 1706
- Joined: May 27, 2005 6:34
- Location: Cambodia, Thailand, Lao, Ireland etc.
- Contact:
You can create an sell a program linked to "fbgfx.bi" but you must make it open source.vdecampo wrote:So I can't create a program that is "MY" creation if I link to "fbgfx.bi"?The only restriction is actually with the Graphics library since it is licensed under the GNU LGPL.
<snip>
-Vince
If you stick to OpenGL code with fbgfx then it is relatively simple to convert it to GLFW if you wish to sell it and keep it closed source. Last time i looked (two years ago) there was an almost a one to one equivalences between fbgfx OpenGL commands and GLFW OpenGL commands, with a zero learning curve if you wish to switch.
Garvan
That is not correct. The LGPL permits the creation of proprietary, closed-source software as long as the library protected by the LGPL is not modified in any way. If you modify a library protected under the LGPL, then your modifications of the library must be released as source code. Furthermore, whatever the case, you must distribute a copy of the LGPL with your application, specifying its usage in your license scheme.Sisophon2001 wrote:You can create an sell a program linked to "fbgfx.bi" but you must make it open source.
-
- Posts: 1706
- Joined: May 27, 2005 6:34
- Location: Cambodia, Thailand, Lao, Ireland etc.
- Contact:
Have a look at this post:Eponasoft wrote:That is not correct. The LGPL permits the creation of proprietary, closed-source software as long as the library protected by the LGPL is not modified in any way. If you modify a library protected under the LGPL, then your modifications of the library must be released as source code. Furthermore, whatever the case, you must distribute a copy of the LGPL with your application, specifying its usage in your license scheme.Sisophon2001 wrote:You can create an sell a program linked to "fbgfx.bi" but you must make it open source.
http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopi ... t=lilo+gpl
I am waiting to be educated.
garvan
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Feb 03, 2007 2:37
My understanding is that just linking to a library does not make your program a derivative work. I read the article in this link three times and think that is what it says. But I could be wrong.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6366
diffeecult
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6366
diffeecult