From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-06 07:29:27
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> If what you say here is true, then what is the point in having both a
> GPL and a LGPL license?
"RMS: We have no say in what is considered a derivative work. That
is a matter of copyright law, decided by courts. When copyright
law holds that a certain thing is not a derivative of our work,
then our license for that work does not apply to it. Whatever our
licenses say, they are operative only for works that are
derivative of our code.
A license can say that we will treat a certain kind of work as if
it were not derivative, even if the courts think it is. The Lesser
GPL does this in certain cases, in effect declining to use some
of the power that the courts would give us. But we cannot tell the
courts to treat a certain kind of work as if it were derivative,
if the courts think it is not."
See also (read the entire thread):
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk