I’m developing a software using JUCE.
In my source code there is a library under the GPL and, obviouslky, all the JUCE stuff, but the rest of the code is mine.
To sell my product I already know I could sell it under the GPL, releasing the source code alongside the binaries.
The point is ->
Can I buy a JUCE Licence, releasing only the GPL libraries’s source code that I’m using alongside the binaries, and don’t release the rest of my source code?
If you buy a license you can sell your product without need to release also your source code for everyone. And you dont have to worried about releasing so SDK code, it’s already released in the GITHUB.
But without JUCE commercial license you have to also release source to everyone who asked to it.
FSF stated GPL will be effective to all code which run in single process. This is just my toughs, and i’m not part of JUCE organisation at anyway.
No. If you are using another GPL library, buying a JUCE licence won’t unGPL the other library. And just releasing the source of the GPLed lib is not enough, otherwise the whole GPL idea would be pointless.
What you’re describing would work if the other library was an _L_GPL library (the “Lesser” GNU license), but if that’s the case another consideration you have to make is being sure that you’re only dynamically linking against the library, rather than statically.
But what the others have said is true - GPL is like a virus in your code, as soon as you integrate some GPL code into your program your entire codebase must become GPL (read: totally open source) to comply with the license.
