I am about to publish a GPL library of classes that helps building an interactive application ( PHP AJAX JavaScript) and the name I chose for it is “PHP Interactive Pages”. Recently I came across the PHP Licesence (Wikipedia) that to be sincere I have never read it carefully. It states that

“Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
from group@php.net. You may indicate that your software works in
conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo" ”

Reading it many times I understood that I couldn’t use “PHP Interactive Pages” as a title without permission. If this is the case what is happening with all the sites – domains – programmes that are not fallowing that rule and can be found easily on net?
I would really like to read you opinions about that.

Thank you

6 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by diafol

You're right that a lot of developers have done this and that seems to indicate that the organization behind PHP isn't aggressively enforcing that part of the license. You could take your chances and ignore the license like many others have done or you can respect the license and take their advice on how you should name it. Calling it "Interactive Pages for PHP" still gets the message across and stays on side with the license requirement.


Thank you chirshea for your point of view. I don’t wont to play against the rules when I am using a work of somebody … like PHP .. Even JAVA is nowadays OpenJDK (GPL) and I will accept the rules they made (PHP Zend) although I consider them hostile to programming community. What I am going to do is naming it PIP without dots and host it in a domain like phpinteractivepages.com … Also in site there will be no mention of PHP Interactive Pages at all and will only refer to it as PIP .. I will do that because I want to play by the rules ….but let me state that if you have rules everyone have to respect them and I am not an idiot accustom my work to that


"PHP Interactive Pages" vs "Interactive Pages for PHP"

The first has a better ring to it. It has, as you mention a cool acronym (pip) or abbreviation (pee-eye-pee).

The second has a more 'official' ring to it though. The important thing is the 'Interactive Pages' - the bomb. The php thingy takes 2nd prize. However, it suggests that interactive pages exist for other languages (sister sites?). Maybe that's just me being lateral.

Would the php guys have a gripe with you? How many php.... sites are there? Have they all got the big thumbs up from the php guys? Anyway, you sound like a choirboy in the company of hoods if you ask me. :)

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.