On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:02:46PM -0600, Tom Tobin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Sebastian Fischer > <s...@informatik.uni-kiel.de> wrote: > > when writing a Haskell library that uses two other Haskell libraries -- one > > licensed under BSD3 and one under LGPL -- what are allowed possibilities for > > licensing the written package? PublicDomain? BSD3? LGPL? > > There was a long thread on licensing recently: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/haskell-cafe@haskell.org/msg68237.html > > I'm still waiting to hear back from the SFLC regarding the questions > we came up with, and I'll post them as soon as I get them. I think in > your case you can license the library you're writing any way you'd > like, but distributing a statically linked binary might leave you with > additional obligations under the LGPL. (Things get wonderfully more > confusing when one of the libraries is the GPL, but hopefully we'll > have more insight regarding that soon.) I'm not a lawyer, though, and > I suggest that you take any advice from non-lawyers as hints rather > than definitive answers. If you want an answer from a lawyer, the > SFLC can be useful: > > http://www.softwarefreedom.org/
You can also ask the Freedom Task Force of the FSFE: http://fsfe.org/projects/ftf/ftf.en.html They may offer better legal advice for Europe. Regards, Matthias-Christian _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe