I fully second this, and your first more elaborate email sounds sensible to me, 
although I do not know enough about it to really evaluate it.

Ralph.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, 7 October, 2014 19:22
> To: Sylvain Munaut; Lev Serebryakov
> Cc: [email protected]; Alexander Kurpiers
> Subject: Re: Using librtlsdr in BSD 2-clause project?
> 
> Sylvain, YOU and the community, particularly the community, will get more out 
> of it if you leave Youssef alone than if you wave a red
> flag in his nose. He's that kind of a person. And I cannot say I blame him 
> for it.
> 
> The license for a DLL or shared library should be LGPL. I realize you are 
> stuck at GPL. But, you can do an Obama and not be a stickler
> for enforcement. This is one instance where that might be appropriate.
> 
> {^_^}
> 
> On 2014-10-07 03:41, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
> >>   SDR# is strange: it doesn't provide even sources of plugin, but
> >> plugin linked directly with library become GPL for sure. Another
> >> question, why SDR# itself doesn't become GPLes, when it links with
> >> library via dynamically-loaded plugin (exactly same situation as with
> >> my project).
> >
> > Mmmm ... when we first evaluated SDR#, the source of the plugin was
> > available and the plugin was shipped separately _without_ any
> > automatic installer (and yes, this makes a difference, automation
> > makes it circuvemption of copyriht covered by DMCA or equivalent).
> >
> > Thanks for bringing this to our attention, we'll take the appropriate 
> > actions.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >     Sylvain
> >



Reply via email to