GPL Licensing Issues

[kkartaltepe]

I noticed this project recently changed it license to the GPLv3. IANAL, but there appear to be some issues with this which would affect anyone attempting to use this code in a GPL-compatible project of their own.

1. Unity is not GPL compatible
2. Leap Motion Unity Modules are not GPL compatible under the Leap Motion developer SDK agreement.
3. Numerous files within the package begin with a header mentioning that they are distributed under the Leap Motion developer SDK agreement which forbids redistribution (a requirement of the GPL).

While I find it admirable to want to use a free software license like the GPL, it does not seem to be a viable licensing choice for this project. My understanding is that this code base is also incompatible with the previous Apache 2.0 license as it also requires redistribution rights to be granted.

If you really do want to distribute this publicly its likely that the only licenses compatible with your dependencies are MIT or similar "open source" licenses which allow you to re-license your code under the proprietary Unity or Leap Motion licenses when distributing derived works including them.

[evolvingfridge]

If MIT is not option re-license your code under MPL 2.0, it is best of both worlds.