[Numpy-discussion] MKL and OpenBLAS
cmkleffner at gmail.com
Sun Feb 2 14:11:26 EST 2014
If you work in an academia world it can be relevant once third parties are
involved in a bigger project. A situation may be reached, where you just
have to prove the license situation of all of your software components.
Numpy and scipy is 'selled' as BSD or MIT based foundation for scientific
software without components with copyleft licences. For the MKL part a
clear statement would be welcome. Otherwise the usage of MKL based binaries
has to be avoided in such situations, even if you don't sell something.
2014-02-02 Sturla Molden <sturla.molden at gmail.com>:
> Carl Kleffner <cmkleffner at gmail.com> wrote:
> > In the case of numpy-MKL the MKL binaries are statically linked to the
> > pyd-files. Given the usefulness, performance and robustness of the
> > MKL-based binaries a definite answer to this question would be desirable.
> > Say: "Can I use and re-redistribute a product with a precompiled
> > numpy-MKL in a commercial enviroment without the need to by a Intel
> I don't see why this is relevant.
> If you make commercial software chances are you can afford a commercial
> license for Intel's C++ or Fortran compiler. If you don't, you don't charge
> your customers enough.
> Also consider this: Can software packed and linked with MKL be sold in a
> store? That is also redistribution, and the store is likely not to own an
> MKL license. There is thus only one reasonable answer.
> And besides, if you make commercial software, chances are your solicitor
> verifies the license rights. If you don't consult a solicitor, that would
> be at your own risk.
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion