Mixing
Can I translate an app under GPLv3 into Swift without using GPLv3?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Can I translate an App from Android using GPLv3 into Swift? Because actually I don't use any source code. Do I need to keep it under GPLv3 and open source? Is there any method to avoid infection if it must under GPLv3?
gpl-3
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Can I translate an App from Android using GPLv3 into Swift? Because actually I don't use any source code. Do I need to keep it under GPLv3 and open source? Is there any method to avoid infection if it must under GPLv3?
gpl-3
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Can I translate an App from Android using GPLv3 into Swift? Because actually I don't use any source code. Do I need to keep it under GPLv3 and open source? Is there any method to avoid infection if it must under GPLv3?
gpl-3
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Can I translate an App from Android using GPLv3 into Swift? Because actually I don't use any source code. Do I need to keep it under GPLv3 and open source? Is there any method to avoid infection if it must under GPLv3?
gpl-3
gpl-3
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
edited 10 mins ago
MDTech.us_MAN
1032
1032
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
asked 17 hours ago
F.Jiang
161
161
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
F.Jiang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
The GPLv3 licence of the original requires that, if you create a work which is (in copyright terms) a derivative of the original, and you distribute your derivative, you must do so under GPLv3.
It's not clear to me in what sense you're using translate. If you mean it in the linguistic sense, translating from one human language to another, then I can't see any way not to create a derivative.
If you're using it to mean converting an application from one programming language to another, this is normally referred to as porting. It is possible to do this in a way that doesn't create a derivative work, but it requires two people, and is known as a clean-room reimplementation. To do this, one person must take the current work apart, and express exactly what it does in a document called a functional specification. The other person then, without ever seeing the original work or directly communicating with the first person, implements the functional specification in the new computer language. This is an enormous amount of work. If you decide to do the port by yourself it is very likely that the work you create would be regarded as a derivative of the original work.
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
MadHatter names one viable way. Another method is to create an emulator. If your Swift emulator emulates enough of the Android runtime, it can run the orignal App (and likely at least a few more Apps, especially the simpler ones).
Because the emulator is a stand-alone work, it's not in any way covered by the original license. Downside: this is hard.
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
The GPLv3 licence of the original requires that, if you create a work which is (in copyright terms) a derivative of the original, and you distribute your derivative, you must do so under GPLv3.
It's not clear to me in what sense you're using translate. If you mean it in the linguistic sense, translating from one human language to another, then I can't see any way not to create a derivative.
If you're using it to mean converting an application from one programming language to another, this is normally referred to as porting. It is possible to do this in a way that doesn't create a derivative work, but it requires two people, and is known as a clean-room reimplementation. To do this, one person must take the current work apart, and express exactly what it does in a document called a functional specification. The other person then, without ever seeing the original work or directly communicating with the first person, implements the functional specification in the new computer language. This is an enormous amount of work. If you decide to do the port by yourself it is very likely that the work you create would be regarded as a derivative of the original work.
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
The GPLv3 licence of the original requires that, if you create a work which is (in copyright terms) a derivative of the original, and you distribute your derivative, you must do so under GPLv3.
It's not clear to me in what sense you're using translate. If you mean it in the linguistic sense, translating from one human language to another, then I can't see any way not to create a derivative.
If you're using it to mean converting an application from one programming language to another, this is normally referred to as porting. It is possible to do this in a way that doesn't create a derivative work, but it requires two people, and is known as a clean-room reimplementation. To do this, one person must take the current work apart, and express exactly what it does in a document called a functional specification. The other person then, without ever seeing the original work or directly communicating with the first person, implements the functional specification in the new computer language. This is an enormous amount of work. If you decide to do the port by yourself it is very likely that the work you create would be regarded as a derivative of the original work.
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
up vote
7
down vote
The GPLv3 licence of the original requires that, if you create a work which is (in copyright terms) a derivative of the original, and you distribute your derivative, you must do so under GPLv3.
It's not clear to me in what sense you're using translate. If you mean it in the linguistic sense, translating from one human language to another, then I can't see any way not to create a derivative.
If you're using it to mean converting an application from one programming language to another, this is normally referred to as porting. It is possible to do this in a way that doesn't create a derivative work, but it requires two people, and is known as a clean-room reimplementation. To do this, one person must take the current work apart, and express exactly what it does in a document called a functional specification. The other person then, without ever seeing the original work or directly communicating with the first person, implements the functional specification in the new computer language. This is an enormous amount of work. If you decide to do the port by yourself it is very likely that the work you create would be regarded as a derivative of the original work.
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
The GPLv3 licence of the original requires that, if you create a work which is (in copyright terms) a derivative of the original, and you distribute your derivative, you must do so under GPLv3.
It's not clear to me in what sense you're using translate. If you mean it in the linguistic sense, translating from one human language to another, then I can't see any way not to create a derivative.
If you're using it to mean converting an application from one programming language to another, this is normally referred to as porting. It is possible to do this in a way that doesn't create a derivative work, but it requires two people, and is known as a clean-room reimplementation. To do this, one person must take the current work apart, and express exactly what it does in a document called a functional specification. The other person then, without ever seeing the original work or directly communicating with the first person, implements the functional specification in the new computer language. This is an enormous amount of work. If you decide to do the port by yourself it is very likely that the work you create would be regarded as a derivative of the original work.
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
answered 17 hours ago
MadHatter
7,1191533
7,1191533
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
add a comment |Â
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
5
5
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
A clean room implementation is of course not required to avoid infringement, it just makes a possible legal defense against copyright infringement claims much easier. Less stringent approaches have more risk, but are not necessarily infringing either. As long as OP doesn't borrow the design and or transcribe sections of the GPL'ed app but does their own design, inspired by the GPL'ed code, they will likely be fine. Copying ideas is allowed :)
– amon
15 hours ago
1
1
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
@amon True, but that would not be considered "translating" or "porting". It would be a totally independent implementation. It's not inspired by the GPLed code, but by the visible behavior of the application and/or its documentation.
– Barmar
13 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
MadHatter names one viable way. Another method is to create an emulator. If your Swift emulator emulates enough of the Android runtime, it can run the orignal App (and likely at least a few more Apps, especially the simpler ones).
Because the emulator is a stand-alone work, it's not in any way covered by the original license. Downside: this is hard.
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
MadHatter names one viable way. Another method is to create an emulator. If your Swift emulator emulates enough of the Android runtime, it can run the orignal App (and likely at least a few more Apps, especially the simpler ones).
Because the emulator is a stand-alone work, it's not in any way covered by the original license. Downside: this is hard.
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
MadHatter names one viable way. Another method is to create an emulator. If your Swift emulator emulates enough of the Android runtime, it can run the orignal App (and likely at least a few more Apps, especially the simpler ones).
Because the emulator is a stand-alone work, it's not in any way covered by the original license. Downside: this is hard.
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
MadHatter names one viable way. Another method is to create an emulator. If your Swift emulator emulates enough of the Android runtime, it can run the orignal App (and likely at least a few more Apps, especially the simpler ones).
Because the emulator is a stand-alone work, it's not in any way covered by the original license. Downside: this is hard.
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
answered 10 hours ago
MSalters
80448
80448
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
F.Jiang is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
F.Jiang is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
F.Jiang is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
F.Jiang is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fopensource.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7464%2fcan-i-translate-an-app-under-gplv3-into-swift-without-using-gplv3%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
