Re: a better copyleft licence
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 04:02:20PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> No doubt some people approve of this, but I think there are a lot of
> people who would prefer to apply a milder form of copyleft to their
> programs. How should they do this?
I thought we had proposed a reasonably decent paragraph to the KDE
people? Can't that be dusted off and used in different contexts?
> Perhaps someone can advise me whether the following paragraph,
> inserted after the paragraph that says "This program is free software;
> you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU
> General Public License ..." would have the right effect, or maybe
> someone can suggest a neater formulation.
> In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public Licence, if
> this software forms part of a program or library ("this work") then you
> may compile and link this work with other programs or libraries ("the
> other works") and distribute the resulting program or library in object
> code or executable form under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General
> Public Licence with the additional special exception to Section 3 of
> that licence that the source code distributed need not include the
> source code for the other works, provided that this work can reasonably
> be considered an independent and separate work from the other works and
> that the other works can reasonably be considered independent and
> separate works from this work.
I'm not sure what advantage this (this clause plus the GPL) is supposed
to have over just using the LGPL?