Python programs always open source?

[Diez B. Roggisch]

Ben Finney schrieb:
> Leif K-Brooks <eurleif at ecritters.biz> writes:
> 
>>>> Ben Finney wrote:
>>>>> So long as you're not distributing some or all of Python itself,
>>>>> or a derivative work, the license for Python has no legal effect
>>>>> on what license you choose for your own work.
> 
>> I was replying to Ben Finney's claim that in a hypothetical world
>> where Python was licensed under the GPL, there would still be no
>> restriction on distributing Python programs under a closed-source
>> license.
> 
> My claim (and IANAL) is that it doesn't matter *what* license Python
> is distributed under; unless you do something with Python that is a
> right of the copyright holder, such as distributing part or all of
> Python, the copyright license terms of Python have no legal effect on
> what license you choose for your own work.

IANAL - having said that:

Not true for the GPL. Part of python is the library, which you either 
use explicit (I can't imagine a program that doesn't, beyond print 
"hello world"), or implicit (sys and os are AFAIX used internally to 
bootstrap the interpreter)

And the GPL exactly requires that when a library licensed under it is 
used, that makes the using program GPL-licensed, too.

And the LGPL (L for lesser or library) remedies that.

If I recall correctly, the LGPL stats that you might use the headers and 
link against a LGPL-lib as long as you don't change it, and you are ok.

So - I would certainly be very cautious when using GPL-based products if 
I wanted to build some closed-source-application on top of it.

Diez