PcHelpware - question on distribution and GPL issues

[Reven]

Further to the FAQ question "How Do I get the source code for Single Click and PcHelpware", specifically the statement:

PcHelpWare is not opensource.
PcHelpWare can not be compiled without spending spending several $100 to purchase the needed third party library files

First of all, I'm not clear on the legality of distributing a GPL program that depends on a non-free DLL. My understanding is that the GPL permitted this only in the case for system libraries that are normally distributed with the operating system or compiler. I don't think 1scdll.dll qualifies. My understanding is, then, that if the distributor of the UI is the same as the author ot 1scdll.dll, then this would require the source for 1scdll.dll to also be distributed. If the distributor of the UI is not the same as the author of 1scdll.dll, then this would mean that the distributor has to cease distribution or use a different license for the UI. Is there anyone out there who is better versed in the law on this?

Secondly, what process is in place to ensure that there is no GPL code in 1scdll.dll? Has there been any third-party auditing?

[Rudi De Vos]

The Dll and Gui is made by me.

THe sourcecode for the GUI is free..., so you can reuse it in your own code. You can make changes and release it as GPL if you want, add a clause that explicit allow it the be used with 1scdll.dll.
As author, you can give a software the license you like the most.

License PcHelpware
-----------------------

The userinterface is GPL or BSD, pick the license you like the most.
1SCDLL.dll is freeware, the user interface can freely link to it.
Can we add remote support to our commercial application ? Yes you can, PcHelpware is not GPL so bundling and distribution with commercial applications is allowed.
Can we make our own remote support program that use 1SCDLL.dll and sell it? Yes, you can. Natural, the added value will have to be something, else people would never buy it.
Can we use the driver and 1SCDLL.dll for something else then remote support? No, both are build with sources from other commercial applications. This mean that i can not allow that it would be use for something simular. Permission can be granted, but by default NO.

This software is subject to the U.S. Export Administration Regulations and other U.S. law, and may not be exported or re-exported to certain countries (currently Afghanistan (Taliban controlled areas), Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) or to persons or entities prohibited from receiving U.S. exports (including Denied Parties, entities on the Bureau of Export Administration Entity List, and Specially Designated Nationals).

export code CCATS# G025801ECCN 5D002

--------------------------------------

Secondly, what process is in place to ensure that there is no GPL code in 1scdll.dll? Has there been any third-party auditing?

Good question, i always wondered myself how you can verify if someone is using code that you released as GPL.
++ You only can use a decompiler, debugger to prove it.
++ But then , when you use a decompiler, you possible violate
that software license. Then you violate a license to prove a license
violation...

For now, you have to believe me when i tell you that no GPL code is used
in the DLL. Looking at the PcHelpware license it would be very stupid to
use GPL sourcecode and allow commercial usage.

[Reven]

I agree, as the author, you can do whatever you want with the software. However, as I understand it, releasing the UI under the GPL is meaningless.

The GPL forbids redistribution of software that links to any non-system library unless the source code for that library is also released. As the author, you can release it however you like, but the GPL is void for anyone who downloads it. The GPL expressly states that if you cannot apply all of its terms, then you can apply none of them. So as a user, I can do nothing with the UI because I am forbidden by you, the author, to have or distribute the source code to the DLL it links to.

Again, this is according to my understanding of the GPL. If I am in error, please correct me.

[Rudi De Vos]

+If the author allow the distribution and use of a "non" GPL library with
his GPL sourcecode, it's perfect legal.
+ GPL say that when you expand the software, you can not do it with a priority library, unless you get permission from ALL authors.
For just released code, this is no problem, but when multiple people made changes and called it GPL you need permission from all of them.

Now, in this case is doesn't matter, the GUI is released as GPL and BSD.
When you don't like GPL use the BSD style.