www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joshua Gay (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-192) Why is LGPL not allowed
Date Sat, 22 Feb 2014 03:14:21 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13909190#comment-13909190
] 

Joshua Gay commented on LEGAL-192:
----------------------------------

Sam, I think you have a good understanding of things (although I think Larry confirming that
early on in this conversation thread should have been enough for you to know that). 

It comes down to whether or not you want to make a compromise. It seems like you made some
useful free software and lots of people can take advantage of it in the manner you intended.
And as Chris stated, lots of downstream users can take advantage of it if you keep it under
the LGPL. That seems like a compelling argument to stick with the LGPL if you ask me, especially
if you continue to have a cordial relationship with Apache Foundation and specific Apache
projects. 

And, in terms of contributions, including corporate contributions -- I have heard of  a lot
of very successful copyleft projects that are contributed to by companies. In fact, the FSF
takes copyright assignment on a lot of the 350+ packages in the GNU project, and I can assure
you that we have accepted *a lot* of corporate assignments on all sorts of different projects.
I see no hard evidence that lax/permissive licensing will lead to more contributions corporate
or otherwise. But, what I do see is that free software has been massively successful on the
whole and the majority of free software is under one GNU license or another. So, I say stick
to it. That doesn't mean you can't continue to work with Apache and other free software projects.

And, if I'm going to stand on my soap box and rant, I mine as well go all out toss in a couple
of my favorite, and I think inspirational RMS quotes :-)

"A road that lets you go faster is not better if it leads to the wrong place. Compromise is
essential to achieve an ambitious goal, but beware of compromises that lead away from the
goal." 
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html

"Pragmatically speaking, thinking about greater long-term goals will strengthen your will
to resist this pressure. If you focus your mind on the freedom and community that you can
build by staying firm, you will find the strength to do it. “Stand for something, or you
will fall for anything.”
    And if cynics ridicule freedom, ridicule community…if “hard-nosed realists” say
that profit is the only ideal…just ignore them, and use copyleft all the same." 
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html

Have a great weekend!


> Why is LGPL not allowed
> -----------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-192
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-192
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Sam Halliday
>
> According to http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html the LGPL is not allowed because
>   "The LGPL is ineligible primarily due to the restrictions it places on larger works,
violating the third license criterion. Therefore, LGPL-licensed works must not be included
in Apache products."
> where part three is
>   "The license must not place restrictions on the distribution of larger works, other
than to require that the covered component still complies with the conditions of its license."
> But I see no conflict here with regard to distribution. The license clearly states that
software which uses LGPL software can be distributed under whatever license the developer
wishes:
>   http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.html
> The LGPL does, however, require that any changes to the LGPL component is released as
LGPL (including source code).
> I have an LGPL library and there is a desire to see it included in an Apache project.
Since my project places no constraint on the distribution of the larger work, I do not see
why I should have to change the license in order to comply with these rules.
> If I was using the GPL, I would see your point. But this is the LGPL and it appears to
meet your objectives.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)

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


Mime
View raw message