# RoR and Ruby Licensing **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [March 27, 2007, 1:58am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255 "2007-03-27T01:58:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f9ae1b/32.png) [@soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/soroe)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2007, 1:58am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255/1 "2007-03-27T01:58:22Z")
Hey Guys, I have some questions in regards to the applications that I create using RoR and Ruby. Do I own the copyright on the scripts that I author? Can I distribute my scripts as proprietary? I think I’m good with the the MIT license (for RoR) since it covers just the modification and distribution of the RoR framework. In regards to the Ruby interpreter and libraries, I’m a little fuzzy. My scripts are inputs to the Ruby interpreter which I would think would qualify me for clause (5) 1. The scripts and library files supplied as input to or produced as output from the software do not automatically fall under the copyright of the software, but belong to whomever generated them, On the other-hand, I’ve read some discussions about how GPL extends the GPL license to any software that statically or dynamically links to GPL’ed libraries. Does this apply also to Ruby libraries? If someone can verify/correct my understanding on RoR and Ruby’s license that would be appreciated. Sonny. ---
**Author:** ![soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f9ae1b/32.png) [@soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/soroe)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2007, 3:33am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255/2 "2007-03-27T03:33:31Z")
At 1:58 AM +0200 3/27/07, Sonny C. wrote: > … I’ve read some discussions about how GPL extends the > GPL license to any software that statically or dynamically > links to GPL’ed libraries. Does this apply also to Ruby > libraries? > > If someone can verify/correct my understanding on RoR and > Ruby’s license that would be appreciated. IANAL, but I used to redistribute Free Software… In general, the answer is that (a) you own what you wrote and (b) using Ruby or Rails libraries doesn’t “infect” your code in any manner. Static linking and inclusion of source code are exceptions, but neither tends to be a problem. Use of an interpreter or the supporting libraries is well-trodden ground and isn’t a problem. Open Source licences aren’t supposed to restrict the way in which the code is used, only its redistribution, relicensing, etc. So, as long as your use is within (say) a company, you aren’t likely to have any problem at all. Even when you are redistributing software externally, the rules aren’t onerous: - Don’t claim that you wrote or own others’ material. - Don’t distribute binaries that are based on GPLed code without being willing to distribute the source code, as well. This could, for example, apply to distributing the Ruby interpreter. In any case, accommodating and courteous behavior will get you out of most disputes. Conversely, strict adherence to legalisms may be insufficient to avoid calumny, if you aren’t perceived as being courteous and acting in good faith. ## -r [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm) Rich M. [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume) removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog) +1 650-873-7841 Technical editing and writing, programming, and web development ---
**Author:** ![soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f9ae1b/32.png) [@soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/soroe)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2007, 3:48am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255/3 "2007-03-27T03:48:38Z")
Thanks for detailed explanation, Rich. Much appreciated. Got another follow up question, if I adhere to the conditions you specified (quoted below), can I freely bundle RoR and Ruby with my commercial product? In other words, create a distribution package where the free software pieces have their MIT/Ruby/GPL licenses intact and include my proprietary pieces which are not distributable (without my consent). I believe the answer is yes, but I would greatly appreciate your confirmation. > - Don’t claim that you wrote or own others’ material. > > - Don’t distribute binaries that are based on GPLed code > without being willing to distribute the source code, as > well. This could, for example, apply to distributing > the Ruby interpreter. Sonny. ---
**Author:** ![soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f9ae1b/32.png) [@soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/soroe)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2007, 4:25am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255/4 "2007-03-27T04:25:25Z")
> FYI, a visit to the [www.opensource.org](http://www.opensource.org) is always a good starting > point in these matters, as is a visit to [www.fsf.org](http://www.fsf.org). You should > also read some of Richard Stallman’s essays, in order to get the > rationale behind the GPL, etc. Awesome, thanks for the pointers. Sonny. ---
**Author:** ![soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f9ae1b/32.png) [@soroe](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/soroe)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2007, 4:19am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ror-and-ruby-licensing/90255/5 "2007-03-27T04:19:34Z")
At 3:48 AM +0200 3/27/07, Sonny C. wrote: > Thanks for detailed explanation, Rich. Much appreciated. > > Got another follow up question, if I adhere to the conditions > you specified (quoted below), can I freely bundle RoR and Ruby > with my commercial product? In other words, create a > distribution package where the free software pieces have their > MIT/Ruby/GPL licenses intact and include my proprietary pieces > which are not distributable (without my consent). I believe > the answer is yes, but I would greatly appreciate your > confirmation. In general, the answer is yes. Due diligence requires you to find out, however, about the precise terms of each license on any software you redistribute. Ruby, for example, gives you a choice of licenses. As far as the GPL is concerned, I thrashed out this question a number of years ago with RMS. As long as you don’t declare a “collection copyright” (but limit yourself to the copyright on your own works) and don’t try to override the terms set by the original authors of the included software, you should be OK. FYI, a visit to the [www.opensource.org](http://www.opensource.org) is always a good starting point in these matters, as is a visit to [www.fsf.org](http://www.fsf.org). You should also read some of Richard Stallman’s essays, in order to get the rationale behind the GPL, etc. ## -r [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm) Rich M. [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume) removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog](http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog) +1 650-873-7841 Technical editing and writing, programming, and web development