On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 22:51:44 +0100 Mihai Moldovan wrote: > * On 02/26/2018 10:28 PM, Ole Streicher wrote: > > The LGPL-2.1 starts with > > > > | Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies > > | of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > I am therefore wondering whether the IUPAC/... license text violates > > itself the LGPL license conditions and cannot be distributed in Debian > > at all? > > IANAL: they have not changed LGPL-2.1, but copied it and released it under a > different name. > > As far as I understand, it would only be violating LGPL-2.1, if the text was > changed, but the original name retained (since in such a case, naturally, > you'd > be getting something that isn't LGPL-2.1 under the LGPL-2.1 name). > > By changing the name as well, they made clear that this is not LGPL-2.1, so I > do > not see any violation.
There's probably no violation, I think, since the FSF explicitly [permits](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL) the creation of a modified variant of the GNU GPL, under a different name, with changed instructions-for-use, without the preamble, and without any mention of GNU. I suppose the same rules hold for the GNU LGPL... Anyway, please note that the FSF recommends against contributing to license proliferation! -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgpQawF4efUQh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
