[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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?


Reply to: