On Thursday 2009 January 29 07:52:28 Antonio Diaz Sanchez wrote: > Sorry, this is an off-topic question but I'm sure that Debian people know > a lot about this issue. I would be better discussion for debian-legal, but they aren't likely to take it up without more specifics. > I know some people who is trying to license their software as > dual-license. Their intention is to be also able to release a propietary > version of their software. However, I know that they have used a lot of > LGPL software to build it, so in my opinion it is not possible. Do they > have the right to release the software as dual-license? In my opinion to > release a software as dual-license either all the code has to be developed > by you or the license has to be compatible. Is this right? It is certainly possible to build proprietary (or dual-licenced) software on top of libraries you license under the LGPL. However, you must be careful; any modifications to the LGPL libraries have to be licensed under the LGPL (or GPL) and NOT a proprietary or dual license. Also, works that use the LGPL libraries must be distributed in a way that allows the user to link with their (possibly modified) version of the LGPL library. Still, that's much easier than building proprietary or dual licensed work on top of GPL software. The FSF's interpretation is basically that anytime GPL licensed code is integral to the functioning of the larger work (dynamic linking, static linking, IPC, *anytime*) the larger work must be licensed under the GPL, effectively forbidding proprietary or dual licensed works from being built on it. As long as they are just *using* and *distributing unmodified copies of* the LGPL software, they should be fine. If they are *modifying* and *distributing modified versions of* the LGPL software *those versions* have to be LGPL or GPL licensed. This was the intent of the LGPL -- to allow free software to be a platform upon which non-free software *could* be used. (In specific, Stallman wanted to be able to replace non-free software from the bottom-up as well as from the top-down and, then, once the stack is complete relicense the whole thing under the GPL [an "upgrade" path the LGPL allows).) (This doesn't mention the license versions, but they are mostly tangential.) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.