GPL and MySQL licenses

hello
i want to sell a modified version of a software that was released under the gpl license, it was modified by me, this software uses and depends on mysql, but i don't want to charge my clients $595 for each copy of mysql. as i understand the gpl and mysql licenses, i can sell the software under the gpl if i provide the license and copyright and a way to get the source code, and if i sell the soft under the gpl then i don't have to charge the mysql fee to my clients.

am i right??
can you advice me about what can i do in this situation?

thank you

You can't charge money for modified GPL software, even if you give away the source code.

You may bundle the program with a warranty and charge money for that, but you must also provide a free version with no warranty.

Incorrect. While you can't charge for the licensing itself, you are allowed to charge an arbitrary cost for the physical acts of creating the media, artwork, etc. The GPL also says that you can charge for extra warranty support or similar, should you so choose.Not necessarily. The only restriction on cost that the GPL gives is that access to the copy of all of the relevant source code must not cost more than the cost of the binaries.

R++: You can legally sell copies of your modified software at any arbitrary price, as I said above. Just make sure you follow the other restrictions of the GPL (i.e., the client gets a copy of the source code or signed offer for such, and that the client could legally further modify and redistribute the software for an arbitrary cost.)

Remember, the GPL is not about having the software be free as in "no cost". The GPL is there to enforce the freedom for all users of the software. (In fact, commercial free software development is encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, as it helps pay programmers and other costs such as hardware, bandwidth, etc.)

That's my understanding of it anyway. Hope that helps!

It was this very issue that caused me to switch all development to PostgresSQL. The GPL leaves a lot of interesting questions of fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD). Why would anyone purchase a commercial license for MySQL? It is a GPL'd product and we should all get it for free, right?

It's a common situation of enterprise applications to link to the "free" MySQL library to store data. Now, do they need to sell the commercial MySQL license with their enterprise application, if they decide to sell it? I guess it's how the lawyers consider the definition of a derivative work. GPL states that a derivative work must also be released under GPL.

However, PostgresSQL is under a different license, BSD. It is more commercial friendly. You can sell any derivative work without these fears.

There are those who would prefer to embed or use MySQL in a proprietary application, or perhaps would prefer express warranty and/or technical support for the product. Remember, with Free software such as GPL'd products, the community is generally the maintainer and supporter of the products; whereas with proprietary and/or commercial software, the specific vendor generally maintains and supports the software. For example, if one were to use MySQL in a life-critical task (such as the database backend for a hospital or airport, perhaps), then he or she would be very likely to pay for the warranty and technical support. I.e., if something goes wrong, the hospital or airport knows that MySQL AB Corp. will fix it quickly since they are paying a substantial amount of money for the product in question (in this case, the MySQL database server and client libraries).
I've not seen any such applications. Would you please provide one or more examples? That seems in direct violation of the GNU GPL to me, though I could be mistaken as I'm not a legal expert.They cannot. As I understand it, only MySQL AB Corp. can sell these commercial licenses, as it is the only copyright holder of the MySQL product line, thus it is the only legal entity which can distribute it under multiple license schemas. Other entities which purchase this commercial license or use the GPL'd version of it must abide by the specific terms and conditions set forth in the respective copyright license under which they received it.Correct. The GPL also states the following concerning its definition of "derivative work":(Emphasis added.)

The GNU General Public License ("GPL") and the revised BSD license are both "commercial friendly," as you say. You can charge an arbitrary cost for the physical acts of reproduction, modification, and/or redistribution of the software under both licenses (the other restrictions set forth in the GPL notwithstanding). What you probably mean to say is that the revised BSD license is more friendly to proprietary software development, as it (essentially) allows the developer to do whatever he or she wishes with the software so long as all copyright notices are left intact.

Hope this helps.