www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-192) Why is LGPL not allowed
Date Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:57:57 GMT

Sam

This is the crux of the matter.  You as author get to choose what makes you happy.  

I myself have been writing open source software since the mid 70's and have gone through many
licensing options at different times. These include non-commercial research only (when I was
an academic), gpl, lgpl, ASL and even public domain.  As an author I was glad to have the
flexibility to dictate the terms I was comfortable with. 

Over time, I have decided that the rights I should claim are the rights that I am willing
to fight for. Those are relatively few in number so ASL seems a good fit for me.  

You could a have different logic or prejudice that leads you to a different conclusion. That
is fine.  

However, if that conclusion is incompatible with the ASL then
Apache projects can't include your software.  At that point you have decide between conflicting
goals.  On the one side is the ego boost of having people use your software and implicitly
at least say that you are great and you are good.  On the other side is the likelihood that
somebody will profit from your work and not give you anything in return. This is a bit of
a dog in the manger sort of position but it is pretty natural. 

How you choose is your issue.  

The fact is, however, that you can't have both.  


Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 21, 2014, at 17:32, "Sam Halliday (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I am concerned that the ASF would distribute my works under a license that dilutes the
LGPL.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message