Export to GitHub

openssl-for-windows - issue #1

License(GPL) is very restrictive for Commercial Products.


Posted on Oct 22, 2009 by Grumpy Bird

Can you change the license the license to MIT or BSD?

Comment #1

Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Helpful Camel

or LGPL?

Comment #2

Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Helpful Camel

In fact, I believe this statement from OpenSSL/ssleay makes it so this cannot be distributed under GPL:

"* The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or * derivative of this code cannot be changed. i.e. this code cannot simply be * copied and put under another distribution licence * [including the GNU Public Licence.] "

Please understand, I'm very thankful for your work to release this distribution of this project, but as I'm looking to use it for a commercial project, I believe that this is a valid licensing issue.

Thanks for your time! Mike

Comment #3

Posted on Mar 30, 2010 by Happy Cat

usage of dynamic library (.so) is a special case, completely different from static link of the library.

If my memory is right, GPL places the restriction on the static linking only.

Comment #4

Posted on Apr 15, 2010 by Massive Rabbit

the license is simply incorrect... Compiling some code can't change its license. also the code isn't here. the author did a great job of compiling the library and packaging it beautifully. you have to mess with it a bit to compile it yourself. but you get the same result from compiling the library yourself.

OpenSSL is under a BSD-style license. so this is a just great compilation of openssl. http://www.openssl.org/source/license.html

Comment #5

Posted on Jun 15, 2010 by Massive Dog

Furthermore, GPL license is not distributed nor mentioned in the download. Please change the listed project license to reflect the code's true license: BSD

Comment #6

Posted on Jun 15, 2010 by Massive Dog

Also, the OpenSSL FAQ specifically addresses using OpenSSL with other GPL software http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#LEGAL2

Comment #7

Posted on Oct 22, 2012 by Happy Panda

Comment deleted

Comment #8

Posted on Jan 16, 2014 by Massive Kangaroo

You should definitely fix license stated in project information, to not confuse people.

And, I'm sure, you violate OpenSSL license, clause 6:

    1. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following
  • acknowledgment:
  • "This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project
  • for use in the OpenSSL Toolkit (http://www.openssl.org/)"

You should place a link and acknowledgment at main page.

Anyway, there are http://slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html — regularly updated builds of OpenSSL, including 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 branches, for Windows x32 and x64.

Status: New

Labels:
Type-Defect Priority-Medium