Nick> Not true if they're just using SANE to provide backends for a
Nick> proprietary SANE frontend. The standard SANE boilerplate
Nick> includes an explicit exemption for the backends when linked
Nick> statically into a proprietary application.
True.
Nick> I think this is (for now) a good decision, because the SANE
Nick> backends mostly work with low-level hardware driver stuff. In
Nick> a differently structured operating system, their functionality
Nick> might well be an OS driver module. So we have no reason to
Nick> deny this functionality to proprietary software developers.
I for one would love to know what frontend they're using. If it's
their own, great (and we should mention it on the web page).
Nick> NB Although *linking* the backends to proprietary software is
Nick> allowed, the GPL remains in force in every other way. If they
Nick> find a HP bug and fix it in their static binary, they must
Nick> provide source code for the fixed HP backend in order to be
Nick> permitted to distribute it. More likely they'll choose to send
Nick> the HP developer a fix, and ask that he integrate it...
Correct. Note that the frontends are straight GPL (no exceptions),
however.
--david
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com