Disclaimer: IANAL
"Brad \(Online\) Jarvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I could use a plain English translation of the LGPL:
>
> If I chose to take the AWT from ClassPath and
> modify it for my own VM, are the following statements
> true according to the LGPL?
>
> - I cannot charge a license fee for using my VM
> because of the modified AWT.
You could charge for your VM. You can even charge people for
Classpath source/binaries.
> - the modified AWT source must be made available
> to the end user (e.g. cannot just send class files).
Yes, you must give them source to whatever parts of Classpath you
distribute.
> - the rest of the VM and class packages that don't
> relate to the modified AWT do not fall under the
> same LGPL (i.e. can be private).
Yes, usage of those libraries alone won't force your VM and other
class packages to be non-private.
> - any Java app that uses the modified AWT is also
> not covered under that same LGPL (i.e. can be
> private).
Yes, we've never intended anything otherwise. The point, more or
less, is to produce a free software version of an important part of a
fairly popular language. Sun's current licensing is too restrictive
to be called "free software."
Brian
--
Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
