[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ProgSoc] GPL
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 02:15:52PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:47:11PM +1000, Justin Warren wrote:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 07:25:49PM +1000, jedd wrote:
> > > On Fri, 4 May 2001 17:35, Matt wrote:
> > I believe this is one of the reasons you are asked to assign copyright to
> > the EFF. As an organisation, they can then fight copyright battles on
> Ahem. FSF.
Ahem. Yes, of course, that's what I meant. Just a slipup in the
> > Then again, it's likely that a whole heap of new legal battles would ensue
> > based on grey areas in how people have used GPL code.
> The main grey area seems to be linking and if you do does your code thus
> become licensed under the GPL or not?
Hence the LGPL. I am not as familiar with the LGPL as I am with the GPL,
but does it not attempt to get arround the 'viral' nature of GPL by
allowing library type code to be linked to without affecting the license
of the code which links to it? That is, you may use library code
developed by others through linking without having to jump through all the
GPL hoops and are still able to choose your own license for the main code,
which you wrote. It is only if you modify, embrace or extend the LGPL
code that you would fall under its auspices and have to public source.
Or have I missed the point completely?
Justin Warren - Senior Consultant, Edion Pty Ltd
email@example.com | http://www.edion.com
"Validate me! Give me eternal digital life! Quote me in your .sigs!"
-- djc in the Monastery
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to firstname.lastname@example.org.
If you are having trouble, ask email@example.com for help.