Re: Using octave runtime in a commercial product

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

2009/11/12 Eduardo Fuentetaja <address@hidden>:
> Yes, we'd like to protect the m-files.

I think you mean "restrict", files aren't damaged or hurt when they're
copied, distributed, or studied. If you modify them for the worse,
that could arguably be something that needs to be protected against,
but I don't think that's what you have in mind.

Also, commercial and free aren't contradictory terms, there is much
free software that is being sold for a profit, and profitably so.

The antonym of commercial is gratis; the antonym of free is
proprietary. These pair of antonyms lie on orthogonal axes.

> The idea would be to have an application A that calls a library L.

Since it's in library form, I assume you mean dynamic linking. The
FSF's standing opinion is that dynamic linking constitutes a
derivative work under copyright law, hence covered under the GPL,
although a few people disagree with this, and nobody has successfully
challenged the FSF's opinion in court. I don't recommend you attempt
to challenge this opinion.

If you don't want freedom, Octave isn't for you.