# \[OT\] What does GPL mean? **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [September 18, 2006, 11:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042 "2006-09-18T11:03:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 11:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/1 "2006-09-18T11:03:19Z")
This is off-topic. I’ve been wondering about Ruby applications released under the GPL. What does it exactly mean? The GPL was supposed to apply to software that was explicitly built into the same executable with a GPL licensed software. That is tougher to understand for web software. I guess you could argue that if you use a controller/ view, you must then release the modified file in source code to people who are your customers under the GPL license. But, it does not make sense for a stylesheet or something, does it? If I want to use a stylesheet from a GPL project, what are my obligations? It doesn’t make sense to release the source code of my application because of that. Just wondering what you think. Cheers Mohit. ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 11:15am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/2 "2006-09-18T11:15:20Z")
Hi – On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Mohit S. wrote: > to people who are your customers under the GPL license. > > But, it does not make sense for a stylesheet or something, does it? If > I want to use a stylesheet from a GPL project, what are my obligations? > It doesn’t make sense to release the source code of my application > because of that. > > Just wondering what you think. I think you’re right that it’s off-topic. It’s probably hopeless, but I’d like to suggest that we NOT trigger The Licensing Discussion, for once. David – David A. Black | removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Author of “Ruby for Rails” [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3] DABlog (DAB’s Weblog) [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc. [4] [1] [Ruby for Rails](http://www.manning.com/black) | [3] [http://www.rubypowerandlight.com](http://www.rubypowerandlight.com) [2] [http://dablog.rubypal.com](http://dablog.rubypal.com) | [4] [http://www.rubycentral.org](http://www.rubycentral.org) ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 2:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/3 "2006-09-18T14:29:42Z")
removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid wrote: > > I’d like to suggest that we NOT trigger The Licensing Discussion, for > > David No worries! Understood 🙂 Cheers Mohit. ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 6:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/4 "2006-09-18T18:55:34Z")
Mohit: Wikipedia has a page on software licenses that will lead you to more information than you care to absorb (I’m sure), as well as many, MANY more appropriate places to discuss such things. > **[Comparison of free and open-source software licenses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_software_licenses)** > > This comparison only covers software licenses which have a linked Wikipedia article for details and which are approved by at least one of the following expert groups: the Free Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative, the Debian Project and the Fedora Project. For a list of licenses not specifically intended for software, see List of free-content licences. > FOSS stands for "Free and Open Source Software". There is no one universally agreed-upon definition of FOSS software and various grou... enjoy. c. Mohit S. wrote: > removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid wrote: > > > > I’d like to suggest that we NOT trigger The Licensing Discussion, for > > > David > > No worries! Understood 🙂 > Cheers > Mohit. ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 11:29am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/5 "2006-09-18T11:29:22Z")
Hi – On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid wrote: > > Just wondering what you think. > > I think you’re right that it’s off-topic. It’s probably hopeless, but > I’d like to suggest that we NOT trigger The Licensing Discussion, for > once. At the risk of being guilty of triggering the Off-Topic Meta-Discussion, I should add that I don’t mean to pounce on you or single you out, Mohit – it’s just that licensing posts have a way of spawning very long and OT threads, and it seems to be something that keeps happening. David – David A. Black | removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Author of “Ruby for Rails” [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3] DABlog (DAB’s Weblog) [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc. [4] [1] [Ruby for Rails](http://www.manning.com/black) | [3] [http://www.rubypowerandlight.com](http://www.rubypowerandlight.com) [2] [http://dablog.rubypal.com](http://dablog.rubypal.com) | [4] [http://www.rubycentral.org](http://www.rubycentral.org) ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 7:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/6 "2006-09-18T19:56:41Z")
Cayce B. wrote: > > > > > > > No worries! Understood 🙂 > > Cheers > > Mohit. Thanks for the link! Actually, I have read similar articles and my confusion was specific to what happens if there is a web application project that is released under the GPL (for example, Pandora [1]) and I want to use the stylesheet it uses. I don’t want any of the other code, just the stylesheet. In the case of executable code, I understand the usage requirements, but for a stylesheet I’m not sure what is defined a ‘derivative work’ and how far it extends. But, this thread is closed 😃 for business (to continue) Cheers Mohit. [1] Pandora - [http://rubyforge.org/projects/pandora/](http://rubyforge.org/projects/pandora/) ---
**Author:** ![mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@mohits](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mohits)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 10:11pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ot-what-does-gpl-mean/69042/7 "2006-09-18T22:11:02Z")
It seems to me that Pandora’s license is only meant to apply to the software, not the stylesheets that it uses. The license mentions the “software;” I wouldn’t say a stylesheet is part of that. Whether it is or isn’t, though, I think the best course of action would be to send them an email and ask their opinion.