3 ms·
>According to the licensing page[1], you just need to distribute your executable and core .blend file separately That's simply wrong - your scripts use GPL API
by rubber_duck 10y ago
>According to the licensing page[1], you just need to distribute your executable and core .blend file separately
That's simply wrong - your scripts use GPL APIs - this means your code is derived from GPL - if you could just ship stuff that uses GPL at run-time without being affected LGPL would not exist.
And even if that's how they interpret the license this still means you can't ship smartphone apps.
- thomastjeffery 10y agoClearly you don't understand the GPL. A derivative of the APIs themselves would need to be licensed with the GPL, but calling the APIs would definitely not. Any content you make using blender is not restricted by the GPL (or any other license). Only blender itself is.
- rubber_duck 10y ago>but calling the APIs would definitely not. Why does LGPL exist then ? You're saying you can dynamically link to GPL content from say a scripting language and distribute the GPL stuff separately and you would not be affected by GPL. This is not how I've seen people interpret GPL and is clearly against the spirit of the license. LGPL is meant to cover that use case explicitly.