On 07/07/10 14:16, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: > I am writing to ask guidance from anyone expert in LGPL and dual licensing. > Take hypothetically that I have written a piece of code PMRCODE which is > contributed > to a large project BASE which uses the LGPL licence, the whole of which can > be used > as a library LIB. As a result I decide to use the same licence (LGPL) for > PMRBASE. > > A company COMP wishes to use LIB in its products in a statically linked manner > and asserts that this is not possible with LGPL code. COMP therefore wishes > LIB to be > relicensed under a less restrictive licence (e.g. BSD or MIT) or alternatively > to dual licence the code. As PMRCODE is part of LIB, this would require me, > as author, > to relicence PMRCODE under the same changed licence strategy. > > COMP's argument is that although the LGPL does > allow for inclusion into commercial closed source projects you either have to > distribute the LGPL'd portion as a dynamically linked library > which the end user could replace if desired or a API-based rebuild system. > This may > apparently have undesirable commercial consequences for COMP. > I would appreciate clarification of these issues -
I don't see anything to clarify - everything you assert is correct. > I appreciate they are complex. I > assumed that the LGPL was a reasonable licence system to use and indeed it's > widespread > in the BlueObelisk. However although I'm quite happy for companies to use and > resell > my software - that's part of the OpenSource philosophy - I am not so sure I > should change my licence because it is a better business model for a > downstream commercial > exploiter. > I agree with that - the LGPL is bending over backwards (more than) enough. COMP is saying "bend over backwards more so that I can exploit you harder". Frankly, what a nerve they have! They get fantastic software for free and they give us... what exactly? Where's the balance? Paul. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
